[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140401164057.GA8347@cachalot>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 20:40:57 +0400
From: Vasily Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Proposed approach for malloc to deal with failing brk
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 20:41 -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> We want brk. This is not because "brk is faster than mmap", but
> because it takes a lot of work to replicate what brk does using mmap,
> and there's no hope of making a complex dance of multiple syscalls
> equally efficient. My best idea for emulating brk was to mmap a huge
> PROT_NONE region and gradually mprotect it to PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE,
What problem do you try to solve via PROT_NONE -> PROT_WRITE? Why not
simply instantly mmap it as PROT_WRITE? Linux will not allocate physical pages
until the first access, so you don't lose physical memory when it is not
actually used.
> but it turns out this is what glibc does for per-thread arenas and
> it's really slow, probably because it involves splitting one VMA and
> merging into another.
Yes, both VMA split/merge and PTE/etc. changes.
--
Vasily
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
