Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

if the process depicted in the diagram were to start a second thread, where would that second thead’s stack go in the diagram? The two threads would share the same heap.

Re: Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

#6

Post by bogomipz » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 3:29 PM UTC

The author states:

>It is also possible to create an anonymous memory mapping that does not correspond to any files, being used instead for program data."

This isn't strictly true though is it? It was my understanding even mmap() MAP_ANONYMOUS used a file interface, and that the way the kernel creates anonymous maps is by creating an instance of /dev/zero in tmpfs. Although I believe the file descriptor might be ignored however.

Re: Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

#7

Post by chaitanyav » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 3:51 PM UTC

newscracker wrote: post #2

The title needs 2009 in it, since this article is from that year.

not able to edit the title now :-(

Re: Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

#8

Post by sctb » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:17 PM UTC

newscracker wrote: post #2

The title needs 2009 in it, since this article is from that year.

Updated. Thanks!

Re: Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

#9

Post by dsign » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 4:57 PM UTC

>> In Linux, kernel space is constantly present and maps the same physical memory in all processes.

That's right there together with the city states of Greece and other ancient memories. Meltdown and Specter happened.

Re: Anatomy of a Program in Memory (2009)

#10

Post by qntty » Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 5:07 PM UTC

dsign wrote: post #9

>> In Linux, kernel space is constantly present and maps the same physical memory in all processes. That's right there together with the city states of Greece and other ancient memories. Meltdown and Specter happened.

Explain?