[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190528084927.GB159710@google.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 17:49:27 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...gle.com>,
Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/7] mm: madvise support MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and
MADV_FILE_FILTER
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 01:31:13AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:14 AM Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > if we went with the per vma fd approach then you would get this
> > > feature automatically because map_files would refer to file backed
> > > mappings while map_anon could refer only to anonymous mappings.
> >
> > The reason to add such filter option is to avoid the parsing overhead
> > so map_anon wouldn't be helpful.
>
> Without chiming on whether the filter option is a good idea, I'd like
> to suggest that providing an efficient binary interfaces for pulling
> memory map information out of processes. Some single-system-call
> method for retrieving a binary snapshot of a process's address space
> complete with attributes (selectable, like statx?) for each VMA would
> reduce complexity and increase performance in a variety of areas,
> e.g., Android memory map debugging commands.
I agree it's the best we can get *generally*.
Michal, any opinion?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists