linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] x86/flush_tlb: try flush_tlb_single one by one in flush_tlb

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4FAC3647.8020203@landley.net>
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2012 16:42:31 -0500
From:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
CC:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, arnd@...db.de,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com, jeremy@...p.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, riel@...hat.com, luto@....edu,
	avi@...hat.com, len.brown@...el.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
	fenghua.yu@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, cpw@....com,
	steiner@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, penberg@...nel.org,
	hughd@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, trenn@...e.de, tj@...nel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] x86/flush_tlb: try flush_tlb_single one by one
 in flush_tlb_range

On 05/10/2012 03:50 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
>>
> 
>> Ok, question:
>>
>> we're comparing TLB size with the amount of pages mapped by this mm
>> struct. AFAICT, that doesn't mean that all those mapped pages do have
>> respective entries in the TLB, does it?
>>
>> If so, then the actual entries number is kinda inaccurate, no? We don't
>> really know how many TLB entries actually belong to this mm struct. Or am I
>> missing something?
> 
> No, we can not know the exactly TLB entires for. But usually, when you
> process is doing the mprotect/munmap etc system call, your process has
> taken much of memory and already filled lots of TLB entries.

$ strace true 2>&1 | grep mprotect
mprotect(0x7f67a934b000, 2093056, PROT_NONE) = 0
mprotect(0x7f67a954a000, 16384, PROT_READ) = 0
mprotect(0x607000, 4096, PROT_READ)     = 0
mprotect(0x7f67a9773000, 4096, PROT_READ) = 0

This appears to be part of glibc process setup. Define "usually".

Rob
-- 
GNU/Linux isn't: Linux=GPLv2, GNU=GPLv3+, they can't share code.
Either it's "mere aggregation", or a license violation.  Pick one.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/