linux-kernel - Re: [-mm][PATCH 8/10] fix shmem page migration incorrectness on memcgroup

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:29:52 +0900
From:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"MinChan Kim" <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	"KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Lee Schermerhorn" <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	"Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 8/10] fix shmem page migration incorrectness on
 memcgroup

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:52:01 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:57:56 +0900
> "MinChan Kim" <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 2:41 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> > <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > >> > mem_cgroup_uncharge() against old page is done after radix-tree-replacement.
> > >> > And there were special handling to ingore swap-cache page. But, shmem can
> > >> > be swap-cache and file-cache at the same time. Chekcing PageSwapCache() is
> > >> > not correct here. Check PageAnon() instead.
> > >>
> > >> When/How shmem can be both swap-cache and file-cache ?
> > >> I can't understand that situation.
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > see,
> > >
> > > shmem_writepage()
> > >   -> add_to_swap_cache()
> > >      -> SetPageSwapCache()
> > >
> > >
> > > BTW: his file-cache mean !Anon, not mean !SwapBacked.
> > 
> > Hi KOSAKI-san.
> > Thanks for explaining.
> > 
> > In the migrate_page_move_mapping, the page was already locked in unmap_and_move.
> > Also, we have a lock for that page for calling shmem_writepage.
> > 
> > So I think race problem between shmem_writepage and
> > migrate_page_move_mapping don't occur.
> > But I am not sure I am right.
> > 
> > If I am wrong, could you tell me when race problem happen ? :)
> > 
> You are right. I misundestood the swap/shmem code. there is no race.
> Hmm...
> 
> But situation is a bit complicated.
> - shmem's page is charged as file-cache.
> - shmem's swap cache is still charged by mem_cgroup_cache_charge() because
>   it's implicitly (to memcg) converted to swap cache. 
> - anon's swap cache is charged by mem_cgroup_uncharge_cache_page()
> 
I'm sorry if I misunderstand something.

I think anon's swap cache is:

- charged by nowhere as "cache".
  If anon pages are also on swap cache, charges for them remain charged
  even when mem_cgroup_uncharge_page() is called, because it checks PG_swapcache.
  So, as a result, anon's swap cache is charged.
- uncharged by memcgroup_uncharge_page() in __delete_from_swap_cache()
  after clearing PG_swapcache.

right?

> So, uncharging swap-cache of shmem by mem_cgroup_uncharge_cache_page() is valid.
> Checking PageSwapCache() was bad and Cheking PageAnon() is good.
> (From maintainance view)
> 
agree.


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/