-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
HugeTLB and mlock support? #4
Comments
Sounds interesting! What performance gains do you expect from this? Also, I guess both will be configurable and turned off by default? At least mlock should be opt-in. Maybe hugetlb would depend on the buffer size or something, I'm not very familiar with hugetlb and what pros and cons that has. |
Yep, they are optional in my implementation. I didn't test the performance gain. These two just seems to me a quite standard way to have high-performance shmem |
If you already have an implementation I'd be happy to review it. |
More specifically to be able to add mlock support to shmem-ipc, but let's add all the others while we're at it. diwic/shmem-ipc#4
More specifically to be able to add mlock support to shmem-ipc. diwic/shmem-ipc#4
Hi, I'm trying to add hugetlb and mlock support for the shared memory region to further increase the performance at https://github.com/dovahcrow/shmem-ipc. I can create a PR if you want to make these changes into the main repo.
Note that the implementation is not finished: I am stuck at usingBy reading the Linux source code, it turned out hugetlb does not need set_len!set_len
to increase the size of the memfd (https://github.com/dovahcrow/shmem-ipc/blob/master/src/mem.rs#L81): it always returns EINVAL, and I haven't found a solution yet.Any suggestion is welcomed!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: