linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: avoid livelock on !__GFP

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:	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:40:23 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: avoid livelock on !__GFP_FS allocations

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com> wrote:
> Under the following conditions, __alloc_pages_slowpath can loop
> forever:
> gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT is true
> gfp_mask & __GFP_FS is false
> reclaim and compaction make no progress
> order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER
>
> These conditions happen very often during suspend and resume,
> when pm_restrict_gfp_mask() effectively converts all GFP_KERNEL
> allocations into __GFP_WAIT.

Why does it do that? Why don't we fix the gfp mask instead?

> The oom killer is not run because gfp_mask & __GFP_FS is false,
> but should_alloc_retry will always return true when order is less
> than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER.
>
> Fix __alloc_pages_slowpath to skip retrying when oom killer is
> not allowed by the GFP flags, the same way it would skip if the
> oom killer was allowed but disabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
> ---
>
> An alternative patch would add a did_some_progress argument to
> __alloc_pages_may_oom, and remove the checks in
> __alloc_pages_slowpath that require knowledge of when
> __alloc_pages_may_oom chooses to run out_of_memory. If
> did_some_progress was still zero, it would goto nopage whether
> or not __alloc_pages_may_oom was actually called.
>
>  mm/page_alloc.c |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index fef8dc3..dcd99b3 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -2193,6 +2193,10 @@ rebalance:
>                        }
>
>                        goto restart;
> +               } else {
> +                       /* If we aren't going to try the OOM killer, give up */
> +                       if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> +                               goto nopage;
>                }
>        }

I don't quite understand how __GFP_WAIT is involved here. Which path
is causing the infinite loop?
--
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/