Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1307937

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call

From Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call
Date 2016-01-13 01:30 +0100
Message-ID <qQhu2-8P-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <qPVjQ-1If-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qPXbY-30c-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qPYKJ-4dW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qQ71F-1nL-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qQemu-6vy-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


----- On Jan 12, 2016, at 4:02 PM, Ben Maurer bmaurer@fb.com wrote:

>> One idea I have would be to let the kernel reserve some space either after the
>> first stack address (for a stack growing down) or at the beginning of the
>> allocated TLS area for each thread in copy_thread_tls() by fiddling with
>> sp or the tls base address when creating a thread.
> 
> Could this be implemented by having glibc use a well known symbol name to define
> the per-thread TLS area? If an high performance application wants to avoid any
> relocations in accessing this variable it would define it and that definition
> would override glibc's. This is how things work with malloc. glibc has a
> default malloc implementation but we link jemalloc directly into our binaries.
> in addition to changing the malloc implementation this means that calls to
> malloc don't go through the PLT.

Just to make sure I understand your proposal: defining a well known symbol
with a weak attribute in glibc (or bionic...), e.g.:

int32_t __thread __attribute__((weak)) __getcpu_cache;

so that applications which care about bypassing the PLT can override it with:

int32_t __thread __getcpu_cache;

glibc/bionic would be responsible for calling the getcpu_cache() system call
to register/unregister this TLS variable for each thread.

One thing I would like to figure out is whether we can use this in a way that
would allow introducing getcpu_cache() into applications and libraries
(e.g. lttng-ust tracer) before it gets implemented into glibc, in a way that
would keep forward compatibility for whenever it gets introduced in glibc.

We can declare __getcpu_cache as a weak symbol in arbitrary libraries, and
make them register/unregister the cache through the getcpu_cache syscall.
The main thing that I would need to tweak at the kernel level within the
system call would be to keep a refcount of the number of times the
__getcpu_cache is registered per thread. This would allow multiple registrations,
one per library (e.g. lttng-ust) and one for glibc, but we would validate
that they all register the exact same address for a given thread.

The reference counting trick should also work for cases where applications
define a non-weak __getcpu_cache, and want to call the getcpu_cache
system call to register it themselves (before glibc adds support for it).

Thoughts ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-01-05 08:10 +0100
  RE: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call "Seymour, Shane M" <shane.seymour@hpe.com> - 2016-01-11 23:40 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-01-12 00:10 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-01-12 01:50 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-01-12 03:50 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com> - 2016-01-12 05:30 +0100
            RE: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call "Seymour, Shane M" <shane.seymour@hpe.com> - 2016-01-12 07:50 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-01-12 14:20 +0100
              RE: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com> - 2016-01-12 22:10 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-01-13 01:30 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-01-13 02:50 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> - 2016-01-14 17:00 +0100
    RE: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Implement getcpu_cache system call "Seymour, Shane M" <shane.seymour@hpe.com> - 2016-01-12 00:20 +0100

csiph-web