[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1058679077.23275.1709809843605.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 12:10:43 +0100 (CET)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
upstream+pagemap@...ma-star.at, adobriyan@...il.com,
wangkefeng wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
ryan roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, hughd@...gle.com,
peterx@...hat.com, avagin@...gle.com, lstoakes@...il.com,
vbabka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
usama anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] proc: pagemap: Expose whether a PTE is
writable
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "David Hildenbrand" <david@...hat.com>
> But why is that required? What is the target use case? (I did not get
> the cover letter in my inbox)
>
> We're running slowly but steadily out of bits, so we better make wise
> decisions.
>
> Also, consider: Architectures where the dirty/access bit is not HW
> managed could indicate "writable" here although we *will* get a page
> fault to set the page dirty/accessed.
I'm currently investigating why a real-time application faces unexpected
page faults. Page faults are usually fatal for real-time work loads because
the latency constraints are no longer met.
So, I wrote a small tool to inspect the memory mappings of a process to find
areas which are not correctly pre-faulted. While doing so I noticed that
there is currently no way to detect CoW mappings.
Exposing the writable property of a PTE seemed like a good start to me.
> So best this can universally do is say "this PTE currently has write
> permissions".
Ok.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists