lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] procfs: Add /proc/<pid>/mapped_files
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 04:20:29PM -0800, Calvin Owens wrote:
> Commit b76437579d1344b6 ("procfs: mark thread stack correctly in
> proc/<pid>/maps") introduced logic to mark thread stacks with the
> "[stack:%d]" marker in /proc/<pid>/maps.
>
> This causes reading /proc/<pid>/maps to take O(N^2) time, where N is
> the number of threads sharing an address space, since each line of
> output requires iterating over the VMA list looking for ranges that
> correspond to the stack pointer in any task's register set. When
> dealing with highly-threaded Java applications, reading this file can
> take hours and trigger softlockup dumps.
>
> Eliminating the "[stack:%d]" marker is not a viable option since it's
> been there for some time, and I don't see a way to do the stack check
> more efficiently that wouldn't end up making the whole thing really
> ugly.
>
> The use case I'm specifically concerned with is the lsof command, so
> this patch adds an additional file, "mapped_files", that simply
> iterates over the VMAs associated with the task and outputs a
> newline-delimited list of the pathnames of the files associated with
> the VMAs, if any.
>
> This gives lsof and suchlike a way to determine the pathnames of files
> mapped into a process without incurring the O(N^2) behavior of the
> maps file.

We already have /proc/PID/map_files/ directory which lists all mapped
files. Should we consider relaxing permission checking there and move it
outside CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE instead?

Restriction to CAP_SYSADMIN for follow_link is undertansble, but why do we
restrict readdir and readlink?

--
Kirill A. Shutemov


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-01-14 17:01    [W:0.486 / U:0.512 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site