Re: MADV_DONTNEED semantics? Was: [RFC PATCH] mm: madvise: Ignore repeated MADV_DONTNEED hints

From: Kirill A. Shutemov
Date: Tue Feb 03 2015 - 05:53:17 EST


On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 09:19:15AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [CC linux-api, man pages]
>
> On 02/02/2015 11:22 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 02/02/2015 08:55 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >> This patch identifies when a thread is frequently calling MADV_DONTNEED
> >> on the same region of memory and starts ignoring the hint. On an 8-core
> >> single-socket machine this was the impact on ebizzy using glibc 2.19.
> >
> > The manpage, at least, claims that we zero-fill after MADV_DONTNEED is
> > called:
> >
> >> MADV_DONTNEED
> >> Do not expect access in the near future. (For the time being, the application is finished with the given range, so the kernel can free resources
> >> associated with it.) Subsequent accesses of pages in this range will succeed, but will result either in reloading of the memory contents from the
> >> underlying mapped file (see mmap(2)) or zero-fill-on-demand pages for mappings without an underlying file.
> >
> > So if we have anything depending on the behavior that it's _always_
> > zero-filled after an MADV_DONTNEED, this will break it.
>
> OK, so that's a third person (including me) who understood it as a zero-fill
> guarantee. I think the man page should be clarified (if it's indeed not
> guaranteed), or we have a bug.
>
> The implementation actually skips MADV_DONTNEED for
> VM_LOCKED|VM_HUGETLB|VM_PFNMAP vma's.

It doesn't skip. It fails with -EINVAL. Or I miss something.

> - The word "will result" did sound as a guarantee at least to me. So here it
> could be changed to "may result (unless the advice is ignored)"?

It's too late to fix documentation. Applications already depends on the
beheviour.

--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/