Minimal runnable example
What does brk( ) system call do?
Asks the kernel to let you you read and write to a contiguous chunk of memory called the heap.
If you don't ask, it might segfault you when you try to read and write from that area.
Without brk:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <unistd.h>
int main(void) {
/* Get the first address beyond the end of the heap. */
void *b = sbrk(0);
int *p = (int *)b;
/* May segfault because it is outside of the heap. */
*p = 1;
return 0;
}
With brk:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <assert.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main(void) {
void *b = sbrk(0);
int *p = (int *)b;
/* Move it 2 ints forward */
brk(p + 2);
/* Use the ints. */
*p = 1;
*(p + 1) = 2;
assert(*p == 1);
assert(*(p + 1) == 2);
/* Deallocate back. */
brk(b);
return 0;
}
GitHub upstream.
The above might not hit a new page and not segfault even without the brk, so here is a more aggressive version that allocates 16MiB and is very likely to segfault without the brk:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <assert.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main(void) {
void *b;
char *p, *end;
b = sbrk(0);
p = (char *)b;
end = p + 0x1000000;
brk(end);
while (p < end) {
*(p++) = 1;
}
brk(b);
return 0;
}
Tested on Ubuntu 18.04.
Virtual address space visualization
Before brk:
+------+ <-- Heap Start == Heap End
After brk(p + 2):
+------+ <-- Heap Start + 2 * sizof(int) == Heap End
| |
| You can now write your ints
| in this memory area.
| |
+------+ <-- Heap Start
After brk(b):
+------+ <-- Heap Start == Heap End
To better understand address spaces, you should make yourself familiar with paging: How does x86 paging work?.
Why do we need both brk and sbrk?
brk could of course be implemented with sbrk + offset calculations, both exist just for convenience.
In the backend, the Linux kernel v5.0 has a single system call brk that is used to implement both: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/v5.0/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl#L23
12 common brk __x64_sys_brk
Is brk POSIX?
brk used to be POSIX, but it was removed in POSIX 2001, thus the need for _GNU_SOURCE to access the glibc wrapper.
The removal is likely due to the introduction mmap, which is a superset that allows multiple range to be allocated and more allocation options.
I think there is no valid case where you should to use brk instead of malloc or mmap nowadays.
brk vs malloc
brk is one old possibility of implementing malloc.
mmap is the newer stricly more powerful mechanism which likely all POSIX systems currently use to implement malloc. Here is a minimal runnable mmap memory allocation example.
Can I mix brk and malloc?
If your malloc is implemented with brk, I have no idea how that can possibly not blow up things, since brk only manages a single range of memory.
I could not however find anything about it on the glibc docs, e.g.:
Things will likely just work there I suppose since mmap is likely used for malloc.
See also:
More info
Internally, the kernel decides if the process can have that much memory, and earmarks memory pages for that usage.
This explains how the stack compares to the heap: What is the function of the push / pop instructions used on registers in x86 assembly?
brk()system call is more useful in assembly language than in C. In C,malloc()should be used instead ofbrk()for any data-allocation purposes -- but this does not invalidate the proposed question in any way. – Dregbrk()andsbrk()? The stacks are managed by the page allocator, at a much lower level. – Joshi