Right, if we request heap pages in that area. Are you running into this
issue?

On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 2:26 PM Erik Corry <[email protected]> wrote:

> If your hardware supports 5-level page tables and your kernel is
> reasonably modern you can get addresses today where only the top 8 bits are
> zero:
>
> The following program prints:
>
> Size 64T, addr = 0x2000000000000
> Size 128T, addr = 0xffba0bca5a6000
>
> The high hint to mmap is important - if you don't have that then the
> kernel is backwards compatible and won't give out high addresses beyond the
> 48 bit limit.  This is why V8 still works on such hardware, but it limits
> the amount of virtual memory you can use.
>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
>
> int main() {
>   unsigned long size = 1ULL << 46;
>   for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
>     void* addr = mmap(
>         reinterpret_cast<void*>(1ULL << 49),
>         1ULL << 46,
>         PROT_NONE,
>         MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS,
>         0,
>         0);
>     printf("Size %dT, addr = %p\n", (int)(size >> 40), addr);
>     if (addr == reinterpret_cast<void*>(-1)) {
>       perror("mmap");
>       return 1;
>     }
>     size <<= 1;
>   }
>   return 0;
> }
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 9:24 AM Olivier Flückiger <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, we are not clinging to that design. It really should be a normal
>> compressed pointer. Then we'd have space for a separate mark bit and
>> argument count like on 32 bit architectures. Last I checked there were some
>> technical issues with getting the correct base to uncompress the pointer
>> and it's also kinda performance sensitive. That's why nobody has addressed
>> it so far.
>>
>> That said, I don't think we have to worry about user space pointers in
>> that range according to
>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/x86/x86_64/mm.txt .
>>
>> *oli
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 1:04 PM Erik Corry <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Seems like this will soon be a problem for Linux too.  My /proc/cpuinfo
>>> says:
>>>
>>> address sizes : 52 bits physical, 57 bits virtual
>>>
>>> so it looks like we can't assume the high 16 bits are zero for much
>>> longer.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 22, 2025 at 5:21:16 PM UTC+2 [email protected]
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Per the nearly-approved AIX commit conversation (
>>>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/6320599 ), I would
>>>> like to address V8's mishandling of illumos/amd64 VA48 available address
>>>> space.  The problem is rather straightforward:  illumos amd64 processes
>>>> have their 48-bit available VA space split into two parts.
>>>>
>>>> Per the original amd64/x64 4-level paging spec: the low 47 bits of
>>>> address space: 0x0 -> 0x00007fffffffffff are available, AND SO IS the high
>>>> 47 bits of available address space: 0xffff800000000000 ->
>>>> 0xffffffffffffffff.  Notwithstanding carve-outs toward the extremes of the
>>>> 64-bit address space (i.e. not too close to 0 or to 0xffffffffffffffff),
>>>> memory mappings can come from either of those ranges.
>>>>
>>>> For pointer-compression that shifts 16 bits to the left, the easy thing
>>>> to do is to check the highest-order compressed-pointer bit, and fill the
>>>> top 16 with 1s upon decompression.  Decompression is done in
>>>> CodeStubAssembler::LoadCodeObjectFromJSDispatchTable(), and while I
>>>> had my first-attempt implementation picked-apart as part of my experiments
>>>> with Node, the idea is sound.
>>>>
>>>> Also, the choice made in the JS Dispatch Table to mark a free pointer
>>>> with 0xffff in the top 16 bits will not work in an amd64 address space
>>>> using all of the available VA space, because half of it lives in address
>>>> space starting with 0xffff.  A change of marking bits (I used 0xfeed in the
>>>> first-attempt) and better clearing/checking (using logical-and) solves 
>>>> this.
>>>>
>>>> The assumption of only-low-47-bits of virtual address space runs up
>>>> against two problems.  The first is expanded available virtual address
>>>> space beyond 0x0000800000000000.  The aforementioned IBM/AIX changes hint
>>>> at this possibility: All 48 lower bits are available with a fixed non-zero
>>>> 16-bit prefix.  The second is that at least for amd64, address space will
>>>> appear in both the high-end and the low-end of the 64-bit address space.
>>>>
>>>> Already available in some hardware is VA57, which resembles the
>>>> aforementioned VA48 except that the low available space grows to 0x0 ->
>>>> 0x007fffffffffffff, and the high available space grows down to cover
>>>> 0xff80000000000000 -> 0xffffffffffffffff.  Operating systems may offer the
>>>> entirety of both ends of VA57 to a process.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to help correct this in V8 so its downstreams, especially
>>>> Node, can work properly in environments that offer full address space to
>>>> processes.  I'm reading up on https://v8.dev/docs/contribute , and
>>>> please consider this email my following of, "Ask on V8’s mailing list
>>>> for guidance".
>>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> v8-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>>> ---
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "v8-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/1ca103a0-8623-430a-83f4-58ee712b329en%40googlegroups.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/1ca103a0-8623-430a-83f4-58ee712b329en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
>> --
>> v8-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "v8-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAPfE2j2Z%2BZOmz2YH2DUAO9axJcc1XhKECCDjVtTK8gwyHRDESQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAPfE2j2Z%2BZOmz2YH2DUAO9axJcc1XhKECCDjVtTK8gwyHRDESQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> --
> v8-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "v8-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAHZxHpiBxkLHNKXV5_SQUMyCfXC6xt036d0v%3D5BcYwgzscs6sw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAHZxHpiBxkLHNKXV5_SQUMyCfXC6xt036d0v%3D5BcYwgzscs6sw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
-- 
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAPfE2j3DCA4F0Fi6-_DxEcNs7VKKri1RWHkW_nBJwn6LhA_p4Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to