2006-11-17 11:31:27

by moreau francis

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: vm: weird behaviour when munmapping

Hmm, I'm probably missing something but I don't see what. Please be
nice even if the question is really stupid ;)

I'm looking at mmap.c code and to understand it I decided to implement
a dumb char device that implement its own foo_mmap() method. In this
method it defined its own vma ops:

static void foo_vma_open(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
static void foo_vma_close(struct vm_area_struct *vma)

A dumb application mmap the device in order to make foo_mmap() install
the vma ops.

mmap(NULL, 16384, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);

mmap returned 0x2aaae000 for example. Until now, foo_vma_open() and
foo_vma_close() are not called.

Now I want to unmap the first part of the previous mapping to see how
vma ops are called. So I did:

munmap(0x2aaae000, 1024);

and here's what happen:

foo_vma_open(vma) is called with:
vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000

foo_vma_close(vma) is called with:
vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000

However I would have expected:

foo_vma_open(vma) is called with:
vma->vm_start = 0x2aaaf000
vma->vm_end = 0x2aaab2000

foo_vma_close(vma) is called with:
vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000

Can anybody tell me why I get this behaviour ?

thanks

Francis








___________________________________________________________________________
D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d'obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos questions !
Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses
http://fr.answers.yahoo.com


2006-11-17 12:43:41

by Peter Zijlstra

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: vm: weird behaviour when munmapping

On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 11:31 +0000, moreau francis wrote:
> Hmm, I'm probably missing something but I don't see what. Please be
> nice even if the question is really stupid ;)
>
> I'm looking at mmap.c code and to understand it I decided to implement
> a dumb char device that implement its own foo_mmap() method. In this
> method it defined its own vma ops:
>
> static void foo_vma_open(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> static void foo_vma_close(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>
> A dumb application mmap the device in order to make foo_mmap() install
> the vma ops.
>
> mmap(NULL, 16384, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
>
> mmap returned 0x2aaae000 for example. Until now, foo_vma_open() and
> foo_vma_close() are not called.
>
> Now I want to unmap the first part of the previous mapping to see how
> vma ops are called. So I did:
>
> munmap(0x2aaae000, 1024);
>
> and here's what happen:
>
> foo_vma_open(vma) is called with:
> vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
> vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000
>
> foo_vma_close(vma) is called with:
> vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
> vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000
>
> However I would have expected:
>
> foo_vma_open(vma) is called with:
> vma->vm_start = 0x2aaaf000
> vma->vm_end = 0x2aaab2000
>
> foo_vma_close(vma) is called with:
> vma->vm_start = 0x2aaae000
> vma->vm_end = 0x2aaaf000
>
> Can anybody tell me why I get this behaviour ?
>

http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/

Chapter 15. Section 'Virtual Memory Areas'.

Basically; vm_ops->open() is not called on the first vma. With this
munmap() you split the area in two, and it so happens the new vma is the
lower one.