Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Mapping non-contiguous blocks from a file into contiguous memory addresses

I am interested in the prospect of using memory mapped IO, preferably exploiting the facilities in boost::interprocess for cross-platform support, to map non-contiguous system-page-size blocks in a file into a contiguous address space in memory.

A simplified concrete scenario:

I've a number of 'plain-old-data' structures, each of a fixed length (less than the system page size.) These structures are concatenated into a (very long) stream with the type & location of structures determined by the values of those structures that proceed them in the stream. I'm aiming to minimize latency and maximize throughput in a demanding concurrent environment.

I can read this data very effectively by memory-mapping it in blocks of at least twice the system-page-size... and establishing a new mapping immediately having read a structure extending beyond the penultimate system-page-boundary. This allows the code that interacts with the plain-old-data structures to be blissfully unaware that these structures are memory mapped... and, for example, could compare two different structures using memcmp() directly without having to care about page boundaries.

Where things get interesting is with respect to updating these data streams... while they're being (concurrently) read. The strategy I'd like to use is inspired by 'Copy On Write' on a system-page-size granularity... essentially writing 'overlay-pages' - allowing one process to read the old data while another reads the updated data.

While managing which overlay pages to use, and when, isn't necessarily trivial... that's not my main concern. My main concern is that I may have a structure spanning pages 4 and 5, then update a structure wholly contained in page 5... writing the new page in location 6... leaving page 5 to be 'garbage collected' when it is determined to be no-longer reachable. This means that, if I map page 4 into location M, I need to map page 6 into memory location M+page_size... in order to be able to reliably process structures that cross page boundaries using existing (non-memory-mapping-aware) functions.

I'm trying to establish the best strategy, and I'm hampered by documentation I feel is incomplete. Essentially, I need to decouple allocation of address space from memory mapping into that address space. With mmap(), I'm aware that I can use MAP_FIXED - if I wish to explicitly control the mapping location... but I'm unclear how I should reserve address space in order to do this safely. Can I map /dev/zero for two pages without MAP_FIXED, then use MAP_FIXED twice to map two pages into that allocated space at explicit VM addresses? If so, should I call munmap() three times too? Will it leak resources and/or have any other untoward overhead? To make the issue even more complex, I'd like comparable behaviour on Windows... is there any way to do this? Are there neat solutions if I were to compromise my cross-platform ambitions?

--

Thanks for your answer, Mahmoud... I've read, and think I've understood that code... I've compiled it under Linux and it behaves as you suggest.

My main concerns are with line 62 - using MAP_FIXED. It makes some assumptions about mmap, which I've been unable to confirm when I read the documentation I can find. You're mapping the 'update' page into the same address space as mmap() returned initially - I assume that this is 'correct' - i.e. not something that just happens to work on Linux? I'd also need to assume that it works cross-platform for file-mappings as well as anonymous mappings.

The sample definitely moves me forwards... documenting that what I ultimately need is probably achievable with mmap() on Linux - at least. What I'd really like is a pointer to documentation that shows that the MAP_FIXED line will work as the sample demonstrates... and, idealy, a transformation from the Linux/Unix specific mmap() to a platform independent (Boost::interprocess) approach.

like image 518
aSteve Avatar asked May 04 '12 19:05

aSteve


People also ask

What is Contiguous blocks of memory?

What is contiguous memory? Consecutive blocks of memory allocated to user processes are called contiguous memory. For example, if a user process needs some x bytes of contiguous memory, then all the x bytes will reside in one place in the memory that is defined by a range of memory addresses: 0x0000 to 0x00FF.

What is Contiguous memory allocation in c++?

Contiguous memory allocation is a classical memory allocation model. Here, a system assigns consecutive memory blocks (that is, memory blocks having consecutive addresses) to a process. Contiguous memory allocation is one of the oldest memory allocation methods.

What is non-contiguous storage allocation?

In non-contiguous memory allocation, different parts of a process are allocated to different places in Main Memory. Spanning is allowed which is not possible in other techniques like Dynamic or Static Contiguous memory allocation. That's why paging is needed to ensure effective memory allocation.


2 Answers

Your question is a little confusing. From what I understood, this code will do what you need:

#define PAGESIZE 4096

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <assert.h>

struct StoredObject
{
    int IntVal;
    char StrVal[25];
};

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
    int fd = open("mmapfile", O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_TRUNC, (mode_t) 0600);
    //Set the file to the size of our data (2 pages)
    lseek(fd, PAGESIZE*2 - 1, SEEK_SET);
    write(fd, "", 1); //The final byte

    unsigned char *mapPtr = (unsigned char *) mmap(0, PAGESIZE * 2, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);

    struct StoredObject controlObject;
    controlObject.IntVal = 12;
    strcpy(controlObject.StrVal, "Mary had a little lamb.\n");

    struct StoredObject *mary1;
    mary1 = (struct StoredObject *)(mapPtr + PAGESIZE - 4); //Will fall on the boundary between first and second page
    memcpy(mary1, &controlObject, sizeof(StoredObject));

    printf("%d, %s", mary1->IntVal, mary1->StrVal);
    //Should print "12, Mary had a little lamb.\n"

    struct StoredObject *john1;
    john1 = mary1 + 1; //Comes immediately after mary1 in memory; will start and end in the second page
    memcpy(john1, &controlObject, sizeof(StoredObject));

    john1->IntVal = 42;
    strcpy(john1->StrVal, "John had a little lamb.\n");

    printf("%d, %s", john1->IntVal, john1->StrVal);
    //Should print "12, Mary had a little lamb.\n"

    //Make sure the data's on the disk, as this is the initial, "read-only" data
    msync(mapPtr, PAGESIZE * 2, MS_SYNC);

    //This is the inital data set, now in memory, loaded across two pages
    //At this point, someone could be reading from there. We don't know or care.
    //We want to modify john1, but don't want to write over the existing data
    //Easy as pie.

    //This is the shadow map. COW-like optimization will take place: 
    //we'll map the entire address space from the shared source, then overlap with a new map to modify
    //This is mapped anywhere, letting the system decide what address we'll be using for the new data pointer
    unsigned char *mapPtr2 = (unsigned char *) mmap(0, PAGESIZE * 2, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);

    //Map the second page on top of the first mapping; this is the one that we're modifying. It is *not* backed by disk
    unsigned char *temp = (unsigned char *) mmap(mapPtr2 + PAGESIZE, PAGESIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED | MAP_FIXED | MAP_ANON, 0, 0);
    if (temp == MAP_FAILED)
    {
        printf("Fixed map failed. %s", strerror(errno));
    }
    assert(temp == mapPtr2 + PAGESIZE);

    //Make a copy of the old data that will later be changed
    memcpy(mapPtr2 + PAGESIZE, mapPtr + PAGESIZE, PAGESIZE);

    //The two address spaces should still be identical until this point
    assert(memcmp(mapPtr, mapPtr2, PAGESIZE * 2) == 0);

    //We can now make our changes to the second page as needed
    struct StoredObject *mary2 = (struct StoredObject *)(((unsigned char *)mary1 - mapPtr) + mapPtr2);
    struct StoredObject *john2 = (struct StoredObject *)(((unsigned char *)john1 - mapPtr) + mapPtr2);

    john2->IntVal = 52;
    strcpy(john2->StrVal, "Mike had a little lamb.\n");

    //Test that everything worked OK
    assert(memcmp(mary1, mary2, sizeof(struct StoredObject)) == 0);
    printf("%d, %s", john2->IntVal, john2->StrVal);
    //Should print "52, Mike had a little lamb.\n"

    //Now assume our garbage collection routine has detected that no one is using the original copy of the data
    munmap(mapPtr, PAGESIZE * 2);

    mapPtr = mapPtr2;

    //Now we're done with all our work and want to completely clean up
    munmap(mapPtr2, PAGESIZE * 2);

    close(fd);

    return 0;
}

My modified answer should address your safety concerns. Only use MAP_FIXED on the second mmap call (like I have above). The cool thing about MAP_FIXED is that it lets you overwrite an existing mmap address section. It'll unload the range you're overlapping and replace it with your new mapped content:

 MAP_FIXED
              [...] If the memory
              region specified by addr and len overlaps pages of any existing
              mapping(s), then the overlapped part of the existing mapping(s) will be
              discarded. [...]

This way, you let the OS take care of finding a contiguous memory block of hundreds of megs for you (never call MAP_FIXED on address you don't know for sure isn't available). Then you call MAP_FIXED on a subsection of that now-mapped huge space with the data that you will be modifying. Tada.


On Windows, something like this should work (I'm on a Mac at the moment, so untested):

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
    HANDLE hFile = CreateFile(L"mmapfile", GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE, FILE_SHARE_READ, NULL, CREATE_ALWAYS, FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, NULL);
    //Set the file to the size of our data (2 pages)
    SetFilePointer(hFile, PAGESIZE*2 - 1, 0, FILE_BEGIN);
    DWORD bytesWritten = -1;
    WriteFile(hFile, "", 1, &bytesWritten, NULL);

    HANDLE hMap = CreateFileMapping(hFile, NULL, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, PAGESIZE * 2, NULL);
    unsigned char *mapPtr = (unsigned char *) MapViewOfFile(hMap, FILE_MAP_READ | FILE_MAP_WRITE, 0, 0, PAGESIZE * 2);

    struct StoredObject controlObject;
    controlObject.IntVal = 12;
    strcpy(controlObject.StrVal, "Mary had a little lamb.\n");

    struct StoredObject *mary1;
    mary1 = (struct StoredObject *)(mapPtr + PAGESIZE - 4); //Will fall on the boundary between first and second page
    memcpy(mary1, &controlObject, sizeof(StoredObject));

    printf("%d, %s", mary1->IntVal, mary1->StrVal);
    //Should print "12, Mary had a little lamb.\n"

    struct StoredObject *john1;
    john1 = mary1 + 1; //Comes immediately after mary1 in memory; will start and end in the second page
    memcpy(john1, &controlObject, sizeof(StoredObject));

    john1->IntVal = 42;
    strcpy(john1->StrVal, "John had a little lamb.\n");

    printf("%d, %s", john1->IntVal, john1->StrVal);
    //Should print "12, Mary had a little lamb.\n"

    //Make sure the data's on the disk, as this is the initial, "read-only" data
    //msync(mapPtr, PAGESIZE * 2, MS_SYNC);

    //This is the inital data set, now in memory, loaded across two pages
    //At this point, someone could be reading from there. We don't know or care.
    //We want to modify john1, but don't want to write over the existing data
    //Easy as pie.

    //This is the shadow map. COW-like optimization will take place: 
    //we'll map the entire address space from the shared source, then overlap with a new map to modify
    //This is mapped anywhere, letting the system decide what address we'll be using for the new data pointer
    unsigned char *reservedMem = (unsigned char *) VirtualAlloc(NULL, PAGESIZE * 2, MEM_RESERVE, PAGE_READWRITE);
    HANDLE hMap2 = CreateFileMapping(hFile, NULL, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, PAGESIZE, NULL);
    unsigned char *mapPtr2 = (unsigned char *) MapViewOfFileEx(hMap2, FILE_MAP_READ | FILE_MAP_WRITE, 0, 0, PAGESIZE, reservedMem);

    //Map the second page on top of the first mapping; this is the one that we're modifying. It is *not* backed by disk
    unsigned char *temp = (unsigned char *) MapViewOfFileEx(hMap2, FILE_MAP_READ | FILE_MAP_WRITE, 0, 0, PAGESIZE, reservedMem + PAGESIZE);
    if (temp == NULL)
    {
        printf("Fixed map failed. 0x%x\n", GetLastError());
        return -1;
    }
    assert(temp == mapPtr2 + PAGESIZE);

    //Make a copy of the old data that will later be changed
    memcpy(mapPtr2 + PAGESIZE, mapPtr + PAGESIZE, PAGESIZE);

    //The two address spaces should still be identical until this point
    assert(memcmp(mapPtr, mapPtr2, PAGESIZE * 2) == 0);

    //We can now make our changes to the second page as needed
    struct StoredObject *mary2 = (struct StoredObject *)(((unsigned char *)mary1 - mapPtr) + mapPtr2);
    struct StoredObject *john2 = (struct StoredObject *)(((unsigned char *)john1 - mapPtr) + mapPtr2);

    john2->IntVal = 52;
    strcpy(john2->StrVal, "Mike had a little lamb.\n");

    //Test that everything worked OK
    assert(memcmp(mary1, mary2, sizeof(struct StoredObject)) == 0);
    printf("%d, %s", john2->IntVal, john2->StrVal);
    //Should print "52, Mike had a little lamb.\n"

    //Now assume our garbage collection routine has detected that no one is using the original copy of the data
    //munmap(mapPtr, PAGESIZE * 2);

    mapPtr = mapPtr2;

    //Now we're done with all our work and want to completely clean up
    //munmap(mapPtr2, PAGESIZE * 2);

    //close(fd);

    return 0;
}
like image 152
Mahmoud Al-Qudsi Avatar answered Sep 22 '22 20:09

Mahmoud Al-Qudsi


but I'm unclear how I should reserve address space in order to do this safely

That's going to vary by OS, but a little digging on msdn for mmap (I started with "xp mmap" on the msdn search) shows Microsoft have their usual VerboseAndHelpfullyCapitalizedNames for (the many) functions that implement pieces of mmap. Both the file- and anonymous- mappers can handle fixed-address requests just the same as any POSIX-2001 system can, i.e. if something else in your address space is talking to the kernel, you get to sort it out. No way I'm going to touch "safely", there's no such thing as "safely" with code you're wanting to port to unspecified platforms. You're going to have to build your own pool of pre-mapped anonymous memory that you can unmap and parcel out later under your own control.

like image 42
jthill Avatar answered Sep 23 '22 20:09

jthill