From: Wolfgang Wander <wwc@rentec.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Leaks in mmap address space: 2.6.11.4
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:54:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16992.14366.232980.673857@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200504151646.j3FGkLQ00256@troll.rentec.com>
Here is another program that illustrates the problem which this time
in C and without using glibc allocation schemes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
/* run in 32 bit mode on 64Bit kernel, >4GB of RAM is helpful */
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#define bsz 600 /* number of mmaps to keep */
#define large 9500000 /* some odd large number */
#define success 1000000 /* number of iterations before we believe we are ok*/
/* program fails here on 2.6.11.4 kernel after 52K iterations
with a fragmented /proc/self/mmap, 2.4 kernels behave fine */
void
aLLocator()
{
char* bvec[bsz];
unsigned int i;
memset( bvec,0,sizeof(bvec));
for( i = 0; i < success ; ++i ) {
unsigned oidx;
unsigned kidx;
int len;
kidx = i % bsz;
oidx = (i+bsz/10) % bsz;
len = (oidx & 7) ? ((oidx&7)* 1048576) : large;
if( bvec[oidx] ) { munmap( bvec[oidx], len ); bvec[oidx] = 0; }
len = (kidx & 7) ? ((kidx&7)* 1048576) : large;
bvec[kidx] = (char*)(mmap(0, len, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0));
if( bvec[kidx] == (char*)(-1) ) {
printf("Failed after %d rounds\n", i);
break;
}
}
}
int main() {
FILE *f;
int c;
aLLocator();
f = fopen( "/proc/self/maps", "r" );
while( (c = fgetc(f)) != EOF )
putchar(c);
fclose(f);
return 0;
}
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Wander writes:
> Hi,
>
> we are running some pretty large applications in 32bit mode on 64bit
> AMD kernels (8GB Ram, Dual AMD64 CPUs, SMP). Kernel is 2.6.11.4 or
> 2.4.21.
>
> Some of these applications run consistently out of memory but only
> on 2.6 machines. In fact large memory allocations that libc answers
> with private mmaps seem to contribute to the problem: 2.4 kernels
> are able to combine these mmaps to large chunks whereas 2.6
> generates a rather fragmented /proc/self/maps table.
>
> The following C++ program reproduces the error (compiled statically
> on a 32bit machine to get exactly the same executable for 2.4 and
> 2.6 environments):
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-15 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-15 16:46 Wolfgang Wander
2005-04-15 21:54 ` Wolfgang Wander [this message]
2005-04-21 14:49 ` Avoiding maps fragmentation Was: " Wolfgang Wander
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16992.14366.232980.673857@gargle.gargle.HOWL \
--to=wwc@rentec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®