LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software > Linux - Kernel
User Name
Password
Linux - Kernel This forum is for all discussion relating to the Linux kernel.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 04-25-2006, 08:32 PM   #1
awang987
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
Accessing shared memory from kernel


I'm writing a small module in kernel space.
This module needs to read config info in user space.
Can the module access a shared memory set up in the user space by calling shmat()?
Thanks.
 
Old 04-25-2006, 09:36 PM   #2
sundialsvcs
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 5,425

Rep: Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159
The kernel can access anything.

There are several ways that you can integrate your module into the rest of the system, depending on what it needs to do. Each of these techniques implies a different way of providing parameters to and from the kernel code.

Probably the most flexible approach is to define your module as a virtual-device. When the module is loaded into memory, it defines a device-node, which will appear in (say) the /dev subdirectory. User applications communicate with the code by opening the device and issuing read, write, or ioctl() calls to it.

The virtual-device strategy has many advantages: user-code can access it with ordinary calls; there's already some permission checking available (you can set the "owner" and the "chmod" bits); and there's a lot of kernel infrastructure at your disposal. In this case, the protocol would be that your programs must first open the device, then issue an initializing call to it (either a write or an ioctl), then proceed with other requests.

For other possibilities, consider the /proc or /sys facilities... unique to Linux and quite astonishing.

A third possibility would be a custom system-call. The problem here is that the chances of "interference" with other things, or compatibility problems with future code, are high. And, programs have to do special things to issue these calls whereas they can "read and write to a file" a dozen different ways.
 
Old 04-25-2006, 10:45 PM   #3
awang987
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 3

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Hi Sundialsvcs,
Thanks for the info.
I understand that I could implement an virtual device driver for the kernel module or adding a new system call for the user module to call to achieve what I want. These methods have been mentioned in almost every kernel book.
But I just want to know that if shared memory can be another way (may not be a good way) for a kernel module to access info in user space.
Somehow the doc of shmat() never mentions if it can be called from kernel space.
Thanks again.
 
Old 04-28-2006, 10:55 AM   #4
sundialsvcs
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 5,425

Rep: Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159Reputation: 1159
No, shmat() is a system call, designed to be used by a user-mode process. (Or, I presume, a kernel thread.)

A shared-memory object is certainly something that can be used as a communication area between oneself and the kernel. But it seems to me that it's something that a user process would allocate and somehow use in a particular system-call.

One of the things that's sorta keeping me in the dark here is that you really haven't explained what you're trying to do. What this kernel-module of yours is supposed to do and for whom.

"The kernel" really has two different aspects to its personality. One is non-moving: it's a collection of very privileged subroutines. The other is moving: a set of kernel-level threads which operate asynchronously in kernel-space to perform tasks like paging. The existing "read/write/ioctl to a file" metaphor is used a lot in Linux, e.g. /proc, /sys. But you don't usually see the kernel grabbing a user-available object, because that would make the implementation of that object quite tricky.

One possibility that you might look into for ideas is the "event" mechanism that's used, say, by hotplug or udev, where the kernel-level code communicates with a process by means of a write-only virtual file. This puts most of the "real work" into the hands of a root-privileged but otherwise-ordinary user mode process.
 
Old 04-29-2006, 01:26 AM   #5
rick.2g
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Posts: 41

Rep: Reputation: 15
awang,

kernel space and user space are __meant__ to be separated, so if you're looking to access a specific program's mem, then you're best off trying to implement it as much as possible in kernel space, not user. Overlap between the two is __NOT__ encouraged - potential problems GALORE.

really, the kernel shouldn't deal with app memory, and the apps shouldn't deal with kernel memory. The only times when you'd want to make exceptions would have to be some pretty exotic applications. If you think it's one of those cases, I'd like to hear more about it.
 
Old 04-29-2006, 04:57 PM   #6
awang987
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 3

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Our application is handling TCP connections.
User would config policy for different TCP connections.
These policies are needed for a number of user processes. Therefore, a shared
memory is created to share the policy table for all user processes.
Only one process writes to the table the rest are read only from the table.

Now, In the net filter module in the kernel we add a piece of code to check and handle all the incoming TCP traffic against the configured policies.
Since we don't want to duplicated the policy table we could keep the table in kernel and use a system call for user processes to access it.
But the table is big and quite dynamic ie. add, delete, sort and search.
Also there is priority and other constraint associated with the policies.
therefore, sequential search is used.
With these constraints, it is not a good idea to implement the table in the kernel space.

So if net filter can access (read only) the table in the shared memory then our work can be much simplified.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Accessing shared directory in linux? Infernal211283 Linux - Newbie 2 12-11-2005 09:00 AM
is shared memory expandable in memory size? Thinking Programming 4 08-16-2005 10:57 AM
Accessing apache shared hosts? Seventh Linux - Software 1 03-19-2005 09:46 AM
IPC Shared Memory support in kernel? stevho Linux - General 1 01-17-2002 08:48 PM
Question about accessing shared directories zikfreak Linux - Newbie 0 08-18-2001 05:19 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration