From: Till Smejkal <till.smejkal@hpe.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Till Smejkal <till.smejkal@hpe.com>
Subject: Benchmarks for the Linux kernel MM architecture
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:29:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170106222912.o6vkh7rarxdak4ga@arch-test> (raw)
Dear Linux MM community
My name is Till Smejkal and I am a PhD Student at Hewlett Packard Enterprise. For a
couple of weeks I have been working on a patchset for the Linux kernel which
introduces a new functionality that allows address spaces to be first class citizens
in the OS. The implementation is based on a concept presented in this [1] paper.
The basic idea of the patchset is that an AS not necessarily needs to be coupled with
a process but can be created and destroyed independently. A process still has its own
AS which is created with the process and which also gets destroyed with the process,
but in addition there can be other AS in the OS which are not bound to the lifetime
of any process. These additional AS have to be created and destroyed actively by the
user and can be attached to a process as additional AS. Attaching such an AS to a
process allows the process to have different views on the memory between which the
process can switch arbitrarily during its executing.
This feature can be used in various different ways. For example to compartmentalize a
process for security reasons or to improve the performance of data-centric
applications.
However, before I intend to submit the patchset to LKML, I first like to perform
some benchmarks to identify possible performance drawbacks introduced by my changes
to the original memory management architecture. Hence, I would like to ask if anyone
of you could point me to some benchmarks which I can run to test my patchset and
compare it against the original implementation.
If there are any questions, please feel free to ask me. I am happy to answer any
question related to the patchset and its idea/intention.
Regards
Till
P.S.: Please keep me in the CC since I am not subscribed to this mailing list.
[1] http://impact.crhc.illinois.edu/shared/Papers/ASPLOS16-SpaceJMP.pdf
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2017-01-06 22:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-06 22:29 Till Smejkal [this message]
2017-01-10 15:35 ` David Nellans
2017-01-11 3:10 ` Hillf Danton
2017-01-23 23:27 ` Till Smejkal
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=20170106222912.o6vkh7rarxdak4ga@arch-test \
--to=till.smejkal@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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