Why is execve so monolitic?
Hi, I have a tought "why stuff is'nt that way question" that just got closed on SO. I am really lost on where to find someone able to answer me. If you thinks it's not the place, please let me know. Basically I don't understand why no interface exists that separate the loading phase from the execution one. To me its just a matter of code organization and should have been done long ago. So I suspect to something be wrong in my representation.
Original Question
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64336459/why-execve-is-so-monolitic
I have a C project where I pass most of the time executing the same small external process (Always the same but chosen by user, that run with different arguments). The external process is really short and fast, and I measured that the fork/execve call is taking an overwhelming time of the operation.
It just strike me how there is just no way to save the whole loading phase. For each execution you need the OS to go from a path to the whole process image again just to change argv, and I pay the price millions of times. This involve opening the executable file, detecting format/shebang, parsing the format, for ELF resolving dynamic libraries calls by calling ld-linux, creating kernels structures to monitor process...
My dreams execution interface would expose two functions:
1.A function that from a path create a C structure representing some sort of ready to execute process image which would use the already existing first part of execve code. This image would have an empty stack.
2.And another one that map that image where it need to be executed, taking care to set up the stack so it would match given argv and envp.
It would obviously not change anything in regard to the execve interface which would just call internally the two functions in a row.
Not to mention the fact that this would probably also facilitate the implementation of software willing to copy there current state to disk for later continuation.
Clearly there is something that I don't understand and would like someone that know well about this subject explaining what is preventing the execution to work like that? Is it some kind of security problem? Or have I a wrong representation on how process are loaded and this could not work maybe? In that case can someone point me toward where is my misconception?
Thanks for the attention.
What can I do?
Also, the original question got closed as unfocused on SO because I also asked for suggestion to diminish the overhead of execution. I think this website must probably be more open than SO in this regard. So if you have any idea, experience in this subject, I will take it.
What I planned to do (I would like your feed back on thoses as well):
1- Use posix_spawn.
2- Create a ram file copy of the exe and run posix_spawn on it unstead of disk file.
3- Use prelink on the exe beforehand.
Thanks!
Categories
- All Categories
- 60 LFX Mentorship
- 113 LFX Mentorship: Linux Kernel
- 612 Linux Foundation IT Professional Programs
- 320 Cloud Engineer IT Professional Program
- 137 Advanced Cloud Engineer IT Professional Program
- 55 DevOps Engineer IT Professional Program
- 68 Cloud Native Developer IT Professional Program
- 6 Express Training Courses
- 6 Express Courses - Discussion Forum
- 2.3K Training Courses
- 19 LFC110 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 8 LFC131 Class Forum
- 30 LFD102 Class Forum
- 173 LFD103 Class Forum
- 22 LFD121 Class Forum
- 2 LFD137 Class Forum
- 61 LFD201 Class Forum
- 2 LFD210 Class Forum
- 1 LFD210-CN Class Forum
- 1 LFD213 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 128 LFD232 Class Forum - Discontinued
- LFD237 Class Forum
- 23 LFD254 Class Forum
- 650 LFD259 Class Forum
- 108 LFD272 Class Forum
- 1 LFD272-JP クラス フォーラム
- 4 LFD273 Class Forum
- 2 LFS145 Class Forum
- 28 LFS200 Class Forum
- 740 LFS201 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 1 LFS201-JP クラス フォーラム
- 11 LFS203 Class Forum
- 92 LFS207 Class Forum
- 301 LFS211 Class Forum
- 54 LFS216 Class Forum
- 47 LFS241 Class Forum
- 41 LFS242 Class Forum
- 37 LFS243 Class Forum
- 12 LFS244 Class Forum
- 41 LFS250 Class Forum
- 1 LFS250-JP クラス フォーラム
- LFS251 Class Forum
- 142 LFS253 Class Forum
- LFS254 Class Forum
- LFS255 Class Forum
- LFS256 Class Forum
- LFS257 Class Forum
- 1.1K LFS258 Class Forum
- 10 LFS258-JP クラス フォーラム
- 106 LFS260 Class Forum
- 143 LFS261 Class Forum
- 38 LFS262 Class Forum
- 83 LFS263 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 15 LFS264 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 11 LFS266 Class Forum - Discontinued
- 20 LFS267 Class Forum
- 18 LFS268 Class Forum
- 26 LFS269 Class Forum
- 204 LFS272 Class Forum
- 1 LFS272-JP クラス フォーラム
- LFS274 Class Forum
- 3 LFS281 Class Forum
- 249 LFW211 Class Forum
- 177 LFW212 Class Forum
- 9 SKF100 Class Forum
- SKF200 Class Forum
- 907 Hardware
- 220 Drivers
- 74 I/O Devices
- 44 Monitors
- 116 Multimedia
- 210 Networking
- 102 Printers & Scanners
- 86 Storage
- 764 Linux Distributions
- 88 Debian
- 66 Fedora
- 15 Linux Mint
- 13 Mageia
- 24 openSUSE
- 143 Red Hat Enterprise
- 33 Slackware
- 13 SUSE Enterprise
- 357 Ubuntu
- 482 Linux System Administration
- 40 Cloud Computing
- 70 Command Line/Scripting
- Github systems admin projects
- 95 Linux Security
- 80 Network Management
- 108 System Management
- 51 Web Management
- 70 Mobile Computing
- 24 Android
- 31 Development
- 1.2K New to Linux
- 1.1K Getting Started with Linux
- 545 Off Topic
- 132 Introductions
- 223 Small Talk
- 22 Study Material
- 831 Programming and Development
- 282 Kernel Development
- 515 Software Development
- 932 Software
- 260 Applications
- 185 Command Line
- 3 Compiling/Installing
- 77 Games
- 318 Installation
- 65 All In Program
- 65 All In Forum
Upcoming Training
-
August 20, 2018
Kubernetes Administration (LFS458)
-
August 20, 2018
Linux System Administration (LFS301)
-
August 27, 2018
Open Source Virtualization (LFS462)
-
August 27, 2018
Linux Kernel Debugging and Security (LFD440)