[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: per-thread vma caching
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 13:24 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <> wrote:
> >
> > Btw, one concern I had is regarding seqnum overflows... if such
> > scenarios should happen we'd end up potentially returning bogus vmas and
> > getting bus errors and other sorts of issues. So we'd have to flush the
> > caches, but, do we care? I guess on 32bit systems it could be a bit more
> > possible to trigger given enough forking.
> I guess we should do something like
> if (unlikely(!++seqnum))
> flush_vma_cache()
> just to not have to worry about it.
> And we can either use a "#ifndef CONFIG_64BIT" to disable it for the
> 64-bit case (because no, we really don't need to worry about overflow
> in 64 bits ;), or just decide that a 32-bit sequence number actually
> packs better in the structures, and make it be an "u32" even on 64-bit
> architectures?
> It looks like a 32-bit sequence number might pack nicely next to the
> unsigned brk_randomized:1;

And probably specially so for structures like task and mm. I hadn't
considered the benefits of packing vs overflowing. So we can afford
flushing all tasks's vmacache every 4 billion forks.

 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-22 06:42    [W:0.096 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site