Why would Linux waste bytes for tracking unused pages? - linux-kernel

From the file /vobs/linux/kernel/linux/arch/mips/kernel/setup.c (Linux 2.6.30)
pr_info("Wasting %lu bytes for tracking %lu unused pages\n",
(min_low_pfn - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET) * sizeof(struct page),
min_low_pfn - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET);
This line prints
Wasting 64 bytes for tracking 2 unused pages
On my device during boot. What does it actually mean? Why are those bytes wasted?

There is an array of struct page structures, one for each page in physical lowmem.
This message is shown because the memory map provided by the bootloader has reserved the first two pages in your physical memory - those pages will never be used, but there's still two corresponding struct page structures for them.
I wouldn't worry about it, 64 bytes is pretty trivial.

Related

Cache memory design - address decoding

I was given the following problem:
A CPU generates 32 bit addresses for a byte addressable memory. Design an 8 KB cache memory for this CPU (8 KB is the cache size only for the data; it does not include the tag). The block size is 32 bytes. Show the block diagram, and the address decoding for direct mapped cache memory.
I determined that:
8 bits are needed for indexing
5 bits are needed for block offset
19 bits for the tag.
Is my solution correct? How should I do the decoding?
The numbers seem correct, however it is always worth pointing out in your solution that you're taking cache associativity under account. Specifically, 32-8-5=19 is only valid when the cache is directly mapped.
The decoding part is nicely illustrated in your drawing – it's simply the act of taking 32 bits of the address as used by the CPU apart into the tag, index, and offset fields.

Addressing more bytes than virtual address space (PTE size)

A computer system has a 36-bit virtual address space with a page size of 4K (small modification for hex representation), and 4 bytes per page table entry. (example found here, 2nd problem)
PTE->0x11223344 (32 bits)
FullAddress(PTE<<12+PageOffset)->0x11223344AAA (44 bits)
But the offset in the page table cannot be bigger than 2^24 (36-PAGE_SIZE which is 12=24)
So, let's say there is a function f that generates the PTE address, f: {0,1}^24->{0,1}^32, which effectively allows access to 2^24 pages per process.
Bottom line, i would say that one process cannot address the full 2^44 bytes but only 2^36 and it could be potentially beneficial when there are multiple processes.
e.g. The system could allocate to 2^8 processes different chunks of 2^36 memory.
This is the potential benefit?
(This is for single level of page table, for multilevel it will grow even bigger)
I guess the question is similar with: Does Physical Address Extension (PAE) allows a process to utilize more than 4GB or does it just allows a number of processes to utilize more than 4GB?

How is byte addressing implemented in modern computers?

I have trouble understanding how in say a 32-bit computer byte addressing is achieved:
Is the ram itself byte addressable meaning the first byte has address 0 and the second 1 etc? In this case, wouldn't is take 4 read cycles to read a 32-bit word and waste the width of the data bus?
Or does the ram consist of 32-bit words meaning address 0 points to the first 4 bytes and address 2 points to bytes 5 to 8? In this case I would expect the ram interface to make byte addressing possible (from the cpu's point of view)
Think of RAM as 8 bit wide structure with N entries. N is often the size quoted when referring to memory (256 MB - 256M entries, 2GB - 2G entries etc, B is for bytes). When you access this memory, the smallest unit you can address is one of these entries which is 8 bits (1 byte). Since you can only access it at byte level, we call it byte addressable memory.
Now coming to your question about accessing this memory, we do not just access a byte. Most of the time, memory accesses are sent through caches which are there to reduce memory access latency. Caches store data at a higher granularity than a byte or word, normally it is multiple of words. In doing so, caches explore a property called "locality". Locality means, there is a high chance that we either access this data item or a near by data item very soon. So fetching not just the byte, but all the adjacent bytes is not a waste. Think of it as an investment for future, saves you multiple data fetches that you would have done otherwise.
Memory addresses in RAM start with 0th address and they are accessed using the registers with capacity of 8 bit register or 32 bit registers. Based on these registers the value from specific address is accessed by the CPU. If you really need to understand how it works, you will need to run couple of programs using Assembly language to navigate in the physical memory by reading the values directly using registers and register move commands.

Does paging let us use physical memory that is larger than what can be addressed by the CPU’s address pointer length?

I was reading the dinosaur book on Operating System about memory management. I assume this is one of the best books but there's something about paging written in the book which I don't get.
The book says, "A 32-bit CPU uses 32-bit addresses, meaning that a given process space can only be 2^32 bytes (4 TB ). Therefore, paging lets us use physical memory that is larger than what can be addressed by the CPU’s address pointer length."
I don't quite get this part because if the CPU can only refer to 2^32 different physical addresses, if there were 2^32+1 physical addresses, the last address won't be able to be reached by the CPU. So how can paging help with this?
Also, earlier the book says "Frequently, on a 32-bit CPU , each page-table entry is 4 bytes long, but that size can vary as well. A 32-bit entry can point to one of 2^32 physical page frames. If frame size is 4 KB (2^12 ), then a system with 4-byte entries can address 2^44 bytes (or 16 TB ) of physical memory."
I don't see how that is even possible in ideal/theoretical situations, cuz as I understand it, part of the virtual address will refer to an entry of the page table while the other part of the virtual address will refer to the off-set of that particular type in that page. So in the above-mentioned situation put forward by the book, even if the CPU could point to 2^32 different page entries, it won't be able to read any particular byte within that page cuz it doesn't specify the office.
Maybe I've misunderstood the book or there is some part that I missed out. I much appreciate your help! Thanks a lot!
It sounds like you need to burn your book. It's useless.
"[P]aging lets us use physical memory that is larger than what can be addressed by the CPU’s address pointer length" is complete nonsense (unless the book is assigning two different meanings to the term "paging," in which it is still useless).
Let's start with logical addressing. A logical address is composed of a page selector and and offset into the page. Some number (P) of bits will be assigned to the page selector and the remained will be assigned to the offset. If pages are 2^9 bits, there are 23 bits in the page selector and 9 bits for the byte offset within the page.
Note that the 9/23 pick are arbitrary on my part. Most systems these days use larger pages but these are values have been used in the past.
The 23 bits in the page selector are indices into the process page table.
The size of entries in the page table are going to be a power of 2 (and I have never seen one less than 4). For our purposes let's say that each entry is 8-bytes long.
The bits in the page table entry are divided between those that index physical page frames and control bits. let's make the arbitrary choice that 32 bits index page frames and 32 bits are used for control.
That means the system can theoretically MANAGE 2^32 pages that are 2^9 bytes large or a total of 2^41 bytes. If we were to increase the page size from 2^9 to 2^20, the system could theoretically MANAGE 2^52 (32+20) bytes of memory.
Note that each process can still only ACCESS 2^32 bytes. But in my 9-bit page system, 2^9 processes could each access 2^32 pages simultaneously on a system with 2^41 physical bytes of memory (ignoring the need for a shared system address space in this gross oversimplification).
Note that if I change my page table to 32-bits and assign 9 of those bits to control and and 23 to page frame selection, the system can only MANAGE 2^32 bytes of memory (and that was more common than managing greater than 2^32 bytes).
You quote: "Frequently, on a 32-bit CPU , each page-table entry is 4 bytes long, but that size can vary as well. A 32-bit entry can point to one of 2^32 physical page frames. If frame size is 4 KB (2^12 ), then a system with 4-byte entries can address 2^44 bytes (or 16 TB ) of physical memory."
This is theoretical BS. A system that used all 32 bites of the page table entry as an index to page frames could not function. There would have to be some control bits in the page table.
The quotes you are taking from this book are highly misleading. Few (any?) 32-bit processors could even access 2^32 bytes of memory due to address line limitations.
While it is possible that the use of logical pages could allow a processor to manage more memory that the logical address size suggests, that was not the purpose of managing memory in pages.
The purpose of paging—which in its normal and customary usage refers to the movement of virtual memory pages between physical page frames and secondary storage—is to allow processes to access more virtual memory than there was physical memory on the system.
There is an additional system of memory management that is (thankfully) dying out: segments. Segments also provided a means for systems to manage more physical memory than the logical address space would allow.

What do the different columns in the "!heap -flt -s xxxx" windbg command represent

I've been doing some work on high memory issues, and I've been doing a lot of heap analysis in windbg, and I was curious what the different columns really mean in "!heap -flt -s xxxx" command.
I read What do the 'size' numbers mean in the windbg !heap output?, and I looked in my "Windows Internals" book, but I still had a bunch of questions. So the columns and my questions are below.
**HEAP_ENTRY** - What does this pointer really point to? How is it different than UserPtr?
**Size** - What does this size mean? How is it different than UserSize?
**Prev** - This just appears to be the negative offset to get to the previous heap entry. Still not sure exactly how it's used.
**Flags** - Is there any documentation on these flags?
**UserPtr** - What is the user pointer? In all cases I've seen it's always 8 bytes higher than the HEAP_ENTRY, but I don't really know what it points to.
**UserSize** - This appears to be the size of the actual allocation.
**state** - This just tells you what state of this heap entry is (free, busy, etc....)
Example:
HEAP_ENTRY Size Prev Flags UserPtr UserSize - state
0015eeb0 0044 0000 [07] 0015eeb8 00204 - (busy)
HEAP_ENTRY
Heaps store allocated blocks in contiguous Segments of memory, each allocated block starts with a 8-bytes header followed by the actual allocated data. The HEAP_ENTRY column is the address of the beginning of the header of the allocated block.
Size
The heap manager handles blocks in multiple of 8 bytes. The column is the number of 8 bytes chunk allocated. In your sample, 0044 means that the block takes 0x220 bytes (0x44*8).
Prev
Multiply per 8 to have the negative offset in bytes to the previous heap block.
Flags
This is a bitmask that encodes the following information
0x01 - HEAP_ENTRY_BUSY
0x02 - HEAP_ENTRY_EXTRA_PRESENT
0x04 - HEAP_ENTRY_FILL_PATTERN
0x08 - HEAP_ENTRY_VIRTUAL_ALLOC
0x10 - HEAP_ENTRY_LAST_ENTRY
UserPtr
This is the pointer returned to the application by the HeapAlloc (callbed by malloc/new) function. Since the header is always 8 bytes long, it is always HEAP_ENTRY +8.
UserSize
This is the size passed the HeapAlloc function.
state
This is a decoding of the Flags column, telling if the entry is busy, freed, last of its segment, …
Be aware that in Windows 7/2008 R2, heaps are by default using a front-end named LFH (Low fragmented heap) that uses the default heap manager to allocate chunks in which it dispatched user allocated data. For these heaps, UserPtr and UserSize will not point to real user data.
The output of !heap -s displays which heaps are LFH enabled.
From looking at the !heap documentation in the Debugging Tools for Windows help file and the heap docs on MSDN and a great excerpt from Advanced Windows Debugging, here's what I've been able to put together:
HEAP_ENTRY: pointer to entry within the heap. As you found, there is an 8 byte header which contains the data for the HEAP_ENTRY structure. The size of the HEAP_ENTRY structure is 8 bytes which defines the "heap granularity" size. This is used for determining the...
SIZE: size of the entry in terms of the granularity (i.e. the allocation size / 8)
FLAGS: these are defined in winbase.h with explanations found the in MSDN link.
USERPTR: the actual pointer to the allocated (or freed) object
Well, the main difference between HEAP_ENTRY and UserPtr is the due to the fact that heaps have to be indexed, allocated, filled with metadata (like the allocated length made available to user)... otherwise, how could you free(p) something without providing how many bytes were allocated? Same thing with the two size fields: one thing is how big the structure indexing the heap is, one thing is how big is the memory region made available to the user.
The FLAGS, in turn, basically specify which properties of the allocated memory block, if it is committed or just reserved, and, I guess, used by the kernel to rearrange or share memory regions if needed (but as nithins specifies they are documented in MSDN).
The PREV ptr is used to keep track of all the allocated regions and the first pointer is stored in the PEB structure so both user-space and kernel-space code is aware of the allocated heap pools.

Resources