lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH bpf-next v2 27/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting infra for bpf maps
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:58 PM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:47 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:26 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Remove rlimit-based accounting infrastructure code, which is not used
> > > anymore.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> > [...]
> > >
> > > static void bpf_map_put_uref(struct bpf_map *map)
> > > @@ -541,7 +484,7 @@ static void bpf_map_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *filp)
> > > "value_size:\t%u\n"
> > > "max_entries:\t%u\n"
> > > "map_flags:\t%#x\n"
> > > - "memlock:\t%llu\n"
> > > + "memlock:\t%llu\n" /* deprecated */
> >
> > I am not sure whether we can deprecate this one.. How difficult is it
> > to keep this statistics?
> >
>
> It's factually correct now, that BPF map doesn't use any memlock memory, no?

I am not sure whether memlock really means memlock for all users... I bet there
are users who use memlock to check total memory used by the map.

>
> This is actually one way to detect whether RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is necessary
> or not: create a small map, check if it's fdinfo has memlock: 0 or not
> :)

If we do show memlock=0, this is a good check...

Thanks,
Song

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-28 08:07    [W:0.083 / U:0.944 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site