On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 07:26:09AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 01:37:43PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:21:00PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > Now that I think about it, though, perhaps the simplest solution is not
> > > to worry about checking whether _mapcount has saturated, and instead when
> > > adding a new mmap, check whether this task already has it mapped 10 times.
> > > If so, refuse the mapping.
> > That turns out to be quite easy. Comments on this approach?
> This *may* break some remap_file_pages() users.
We have some?! ;-) I don't understand the use case where they want to
map the same page of a file multiple times into the same process. I mean,
yes, of course, they might ask for it, but I don't understand why they would.
Do you have any insight here?
> And it may be rather costly for popular binaries. Consider libc.so.
We already walk this tree to insert the mapping; this just adds a second
walk of the tree to check which overlapping mappings exist. I would
expect it to just make the tree cache-hot.