There are few other threads on this subject but I couldn't find a clear answer.
On Linux, how can the virtual memory work when there is no swap partition to perform Paging, even no secondary I/O device (HDD, SSD, etc.)?
If I take my example: I'm running a custom distribution (from initramfs) on an embedded target which hasn't got any swap partition or secondary storage.
In top, I can clearly see that the running processes are consuming a lot more of virtual addresses (VIRT) than physical ones (RSS), e.g. 500MB vs 20MB.
Is the difference between VIRT and RSS just the memory allocated but never accessed (hence never mapped by the OS)? (memory over-commitment)
I thought Virtual Memory needed Paging (not talking about swapping) to work but I'm starting to believe that I was wrong (and that there is lot of crap online about Linux memory management).
Does it mean that a Page Fault in such configuration will systematically invoke the oom-killer?
Cheers
Virtual Memory is just what the process sees in its memory space. This includes a lot of things:
Actual used RAM
Swapped memory
Memory mapped real files
Memory mapped devices
Copy-on-write anonymous mmaps used for large mallocs
Copy-on-write memory from a forked process
Shared memory
Loaded libraries shared between processes
Only swapped pages and mmapped pages from real files requires hitting a disk on page fault.
If two processes share libc, they will immediately have VIRT > RSS without any overcommitment.
It sounds like you are suffering from the conflation of two distinct concepts: virtual memory and logical address translation.
In logical address translation (logical memory) the CPU presents to each process a unique linear address space. The operating system manage a set of page tables that translate logical addresses to physical memory.
Virtual memory is the process of simulating physical memory by using a secondary storage device. Virtual memory handles the situation where a logical address has no corresponding physical address.
Sadly, most processor documentation conflates those two term.
Virtually memory requires a secondary storage. Logical memory does not. Thus you can have logical memory translation when there is no secondary storage. Such translations can end up being called "virtual" when they are technically "logical."
Related
(I'm new to Linux)
Say I've 1300 MB memory, on a Ubuntu machine. OS and other default programs consumes 300 MB memory and 1000 MB is free for my own applications.
I installed my application and I could configure it to use 700 MB memory, when the application starts.
However I couldn't verify its actual memory usage. Even I disabled swap space.
The "VIRT" value shows a huge value and "RES", "SHR", "%MEM" shows very less value.
It is difficult to find actual physical memory usage, similar to "Resource monitor" in Windows, which will say my application is using 700 MB memory.
Is there any way to find actual physical memory in Ubuntu/Linux ?
TL;DR - Virtual memory is complicated.
The best measure of a Linux processes current usage of physical memory is RES.
The RES value represents the sum of all of the processes pages that are currently resident in physical memory. It includes resident code pages and resident data pages. It also includes shared pages (SHR) that are currently RAM resident, though these pages cannot be exclusively ascribed to >>this<< process.
The VIRT value is actually the sum of all notionally allocated pages for the process, and it includes pages that are currently RAM resident, pages that are currently swapped to disk.
See https://stackoverflow.com/a/56351211/1184752 for another explanation.
Note that RES is giving you (roughly) instantaneous RAM usage. That is what you asked about ...
The "actual" memory usage over time is more complicated because the OS's virtual memory subsystem is typically be swapping pages in and out according to demand. So, for example, some of your application's pages may not have been accesses recently, and the OS may then swap them out (to swap space) to free up RAM for other pages required by your application ... or something else.
The VIRT value while actually representing virtual address space, is a good approximation of total (virtual) memory usage. However, it may be an over-estimate:
Some pages in a processes address space are shared between multiple processes. This includes read-only code segments, pages shared between parent and child processes between vfork and exec, and shared memory segments created using mmap.
Some pages may be set to have illegal access (e.g. for stack red-zones) and may not be backed by either RAM or swap device pages.
Some pages of the address space in certain states may not have been committed to either RAM or disk yet ... depending on how the virtual memory system is implemented. (Consider the case where a process requests a huge memory segment and neither reads from it or writes to it. It is possible that the virtual memory implementation will not allocate RAM pages until the first read or write in the page. And if you use lazy swap reservation, swap pages not be committed either. But beware that you can get into trouble with lazy swap reservation.)
VIRT can also be under-estimate because the OS usually reserves swap space for all pages ... whether they are currently swapped in or swapped out. So if you count the RAM and swap versions of a given page as separate units of storage, VIRT usually underestimates the total storage used.
Finally, if your real goal is to limit your application to using at most
700 MB (of virtual address space) then you can use ulimit -v ... to do this. If the application tries to request memory beyond its limit, the request fails.
I have started reading about memory mapped IO and I'm having some difficulties grasping the concepts
This is what I have understood so far:
Each process has a virtual address space. Memory mapped files are allocated a
specific address range in the virtual address space, that maps to the same address on
the physical memory. This way, all the writes that are done by the disk controller on
the memory(through DMA) will be reflected to the process without any additional
copying. (In a non memory mapped file case, CPU will have to copy the contents over
to the buffer of the process).
My Doubts:
Is my understanding correct?
What will happen if there are multiple processes trying to mmap a
file and there is no continuous block of memory available for direct mapping?
The memory subsystem itself doesn't have any understanding of "files", which are an OS concept, and there have been some operating systems that didn't use files at all. You're close but a little off in your understanding of how mmap works.
Each process does have its own virtual address space, which may have very little to do with the physical memory (lots of virtual address space doesn't have any memory associated at all, ever, and virtual memory that's swapped out doesn't have any physical memory). The system uses some sort of lookup tables (called descriptor tables on x86) that specify what virtual address ranges map to what physical address ranges. Virtual memory that isn't "resident" (swapped out, mmapped but not loaded) has a "not present" entry.
Whenever a program tries to access this memory, the CPU causes a page fault, which tells the OS to go find the appropriate contents somewhere and load them into physical memory. In the case of swap, the contents are loaded out of a swap file or partition; in the case of mmap, they're loaded out of somewhere in the filesystem.
The mechanism for getting them into physical memory and updating the descriptor table can vary. What you're describing is DMA, which lets the drive controller copy contents directly into a block of physical memory, and zero-copy I/O, which is a technique where the OS just creates a new descriptor mapping telling the processor to "teleport" the region of physical memory into the program's address space. Neither is technically required for mmap (the OS could load the file "by hand" and copy it into a new buffer for the program, and this may happen in a read-copy-update situation), but modern systems do it like you described.
The physical memory doesn't necessarily have to be contiguous. When the POSIX version of mmap is called, the OS allocates length bytes for the mapping, but thanks to virtual memory, those bytes could be split up among multiple blocks and mapped together by the processor.
If multiple processes are trying to mmap the same file, the OS behavior depends on whether the access is read-only or read/write; read-only copies can be shared among many processes (such as the actual executable code; this is why even though Chrome may have dozens of processes running, the Chrome binary is only in memory once).
As process has virtual memory which is copied into RAM during run time. As given in the previous post.
Which part of process virtual memory layout does mmap() uses?
I have following doubles :
If memory mapping is inside unallocated memory and it is inside process's virtual memory. As virtual memory helps to avoid one process to touch other process's virtual memory. Then how can memory mapping is used for Interprocess Communication(IPC)?
In OS like Linux, whether has each individual process separate section of heap, stack and memory mapping or all processes have one common section for heap, stack and MMAP?
Example :
if there are P1,P2 and P3 processes are running on linux OS. will all have common table as given in picture or each individual task have separate table to each section.
In 32 bit system, 2^32=4 gigabytes of virtual memory is possible and 1G byte is reserved for kernel and 3 gigabytes for userspace applications. can each individual process have up to 3 gigabytes of virtual memory or sum of all userspace applications size could be 3 gigabytes (i.e virtual memory size of (P1+P2+P3)<=3 gigabytes)?
--
Learner
Using memory mapping for IPC works by mapping the same range of physical memory into two or more virtual address ranges in different processes. This works for communication because both processes are using the exact same memory cells (although they might "see" them differently, at different addresses). You change a value in one mapping, and it is instantly visible in the other mapping in a different process because it is the very same memory.
Every process has its own independent stack and heap. The OS does not care about that at all, it only cares about pages. The heap and the stack are things that are implemented by the application (via the runtime). When you call a function like malloc, the allocator in the runtime either returns a block that it already had reserved earlier or one that it has recylced (you called free earlier), or it asks the OS to reserve some more memory (sbrk or mmap). When you first access this memory, the OS sees a page fault and verifies that you are allowed to access this location (because you've reserved it) and then provides a valid page.
Every process can use (as in "reserve") the whole available address space (3GiB in your example). This does not interfere with any other process. Note that due to fragmentation and alignment, and because your executable and the stack take away a little bit, you will in practice not be able to allocate the full 3 GiB, but you can get close to it.
All processes together can use as much virtual memory as is available on the system (physical RAM plus swap space), but they can only use as much as there is physical memory available at the same time (minus a little bit for this and that, like unpageable kernel memory and such).
As program is stored on flash/disk. For it execution, program is loaded into virtual memory and is mapped to RAM by virtual manager. During its execution process is in RAM. Then where does virtual memory exist (where it has all .text, .data, .stack, .heap)?
The virtual memory is a view of the RAM plus maybe some swap space provided by a virtual memory manager. Modern OSs have virtual memory managers and provide virtual memory to processes so that the executing program can behave as if it had a contiguous address space whose size is not limited by the actual RAM. The pages or blocks making up the virtual memory can be mapped anywhere in the RAM, so that contiguos virtual pages need to be stored in contiguos RAM areas. Or they can be swapped out to page space or swap space, waiting there until needed, whereupon they're read by the OS and mapped to some RAM page.
When you say
During its execution process is in RAM.
This is not entirely correct. Some or all memory pages that belong to the process may be swapped out, as explained.
One more word concerning the answers and comments that say that "virtual" means it doesn't exist. This makes no sense. On the contrary, according to Webster:
being such in essence or effect ...
Hence virtual memory is something (therefore, it exists!) that behaves as if it were memory.
Virtual memory is just like an illusion of RAM. It uses paging to acquire additional RAM that could be used by the processes in operating system.
Virtual memory means memory you can access with "normal" momory access methods, although it isn't clear where the data is actually stored.
It may be
actually in RAM
in a swap area
in another file (memory mapped file)
and access to it will be handled appropriately.
It is a layer of, well, virtualization so that you as a programmer don't have to worry about where the data is actually put.
The original purpose was mainly to be able to provide more memory to processes than we actually have and to extend it with means of swap space, but there are even more:
The OS is free to use the RAM for whatever it seems necessary, e. g. caching. Under some circumstances, it may be more effective to use RAM for cache than for holding parts of a program which hasn't been used for a long time.
Provide additional memory to a program when it requests it: if you call malloc(), the program's library may request the OS to provide a part of memory which can be attached seamlessly into the address space.
Avoid stack overflow: if the stack grows larger and larger, the respective memory section may be extended as well transparently so that the program won't have to worry about it.
A system can even do "overcommitment" of memory: if a process requests a large amount of memory, the OS may say "yes, ok", i. e. provide the memory to the program. That means in the first place "allow the program to access a certain address space area", but this address space is not immediately backed by memory. Only as soon as the program accesses this memory the mapping will be done, and if this cannot be fulfilled, the program is crashed by the Out of emory killer (at least, under Linux).
All this works by page-wise (1 page = 4 kiB) assignment of physical memory to a program, viewed via the program's address space, and this in the amount and frequency as it is needed.
In Linux x86-64 environment, is the entire process allocated on virtual memory pages? By entire process i mean the text, data, bss, heap and stack?
Also, when libc calls Brk, does the kernel returns memory that is managed via pages by virtual memory manager ?
Lastly, can a process get memory on heap, which is not managed by virtual memory manager, in other words, can a process get access to physical memory?
In Linux x86-64 environment, is the entire process allocated on virtual memory pages?
Yes, all processes have a virtual address space, i.e. have their own page table and virtual memory to physical memory mapping pattern.
Also, when libc calls Brk, does the kernel returns memory that is managed via pages by virtual memory manager ?
Yes, in fact, if you aren't hacking the OS kernel, virtual memory is transparent to you.
can a process get memory on heap, which is not managed by virtual memory manager, in other words, can a process get access to physical memory?
No, you can't manage physical memory per my knowledge unless you run your program without support from OS. Because process has its own virtual space, all your action related to memory management is on virtual memory.
A process has one or more tasks (scheduled by the kernel) which for a multi-threaded process are the processes' threads (and for a non-threaded process the task running the process), and it has an address space (and some other resources, e.g. opened file descriptors).
Of course, the address space is in virtual memory. The kernel is allowed to swap pages (to e.g. the swap zone of your disk). It tries hard to avoid doing that (swapping pages to disk is very slow, because the disk access time is in dozens of milliseconds, while the RAM access time is in tenth of microsecond).
text & bss etc are virtual memory segments, which are memory mappings. You can think of a process space as a memory map. The mmap(2) system call is the way to modify it. When an executable is started with execve system call, the kernel establish a few mappings (e.g for text, data, bss, stack, ...). The sbrk(2) system call also change it. Most malloc implementations use mmap (at least for big enough zones) and sometimes sbrk.
You can avoid that a memory range is swapped out by locking it into RAM using the mlock(2) syscall, which usually requires root privilege. It is rarely useful in practice (unless you code real-time applications). There is also the msync syscall (to flush memory to disk), you can of course map a portion of file into virtual memory (using mmap), you can change the protection with mprotect(2), remove map with munmap(2), extend a mapping with mremap -a Linux specific syscall-, and you could even catch the SIGSEGV signal and handle it (often in a machine specific way). The madvise(2) syscall enables you to tune paging with hints.
You can understand the memory map of a process of pid 1234 by reading the /proc/1234/maps file (or also /proc/1234/smaps). (From inside an application, you can use /proc/self/ instead of /proc/1234/ ...) I suggest you to run in a terminal:
cat /proc/self/maps
which will show you the memory map of the process running that cat command. You can also use the pmap utility.
Most recent linux kernels provide Adress Space Layout Randomization (so two similar processes running the same program on the same input have different mmap-ed & malloc-ed addresses). You could disable it thru /proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space
Except in very rare circumstances (uClinux), processes only see virtual memory, which is mapped to physical memory by the kernel.
The kernel can be asked to make specific mappings that give a predictable physical address for a given virtual address; you need the appropriate capability to do that however, as this breaks down the process separation.
On execve, the current mappings are replaced by the loadable segments from the ELF file specified; these are mapped so that referenced pages are loaded from the ELF file (some initial readahead is also performed). The brk system call mainly extends the non-executable mapping with the highest addresses (excluding the stack mapping) by a few pages, allowing the process to access more virtual addresses without being sent a SIGSEGV.
The heap is generally managed by the process internally, but the virtual address space assigned to heap objects must be known to the virtual memory manager beforehand in order to create a mapping. malloc will generally look into its internal tables for a region that is already mapped and usable, and if none can be found, use either brk() or mmap() to create more mappings.