linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] memcg: fix mapcount check in move charge code for anonymous page

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, 6 Mar 2012 12:55:42 -0800 (PST)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
cc:	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: fix mapcount check in move charge code for
 anonymous page

On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> Hi, Horiguchi-san.
> On Fri,  2 Mar 2012 15:35:08 -0500
> Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com> wrote:
> 
> > Currently charge on shared anonyous pages is supposed not to moved
> > in task migration. To implement this, we need to check that mapcount > 1,
> > instread of > 2. So this patch fixes it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/memcontrol.c |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git linux-next-20120228.orig/mm/memcontrol.c linux-next-20120228/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index b6d1bab..785f6d3 100644
> > --- linux-next-20120228.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ linux-next-20120228/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -5102,7 +5102,7 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >  		return NULL;
> >  	if (PageAnon(page)) {
> >  		/* we don't move shared anon */
> > -		if (!move_anon() || page_mapcount(page) > 2)
> > +		if (!move_anon() || page_mapcount(page) > 1)
> >  			return NULL;
> >  	} else if (!move_file())
> >  		/* we ignore mapcount for file pages */
> > -- 
> > 1.7.7.6
> > 
> Sorry, it's my fault..
> Thank you for catching this.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>

I'm perversely sorry to see this fix already wing its way into 3.3-rc,
but never mind.

I was puzzling over that same "> 2" test when thinking through the
stats move locking, and again when swap accounting appeared to be
broken through and through (now fixed by two-liner in page_cgroup.c).

Why is there any test on page_mapcount(page) there at all?
2.6.34 comments it
	* TODO: We don't move charges of shared(used by multiple
	* processes) pages for now.
as if it's an unwelcome restriction to be eliminated later.

I don't understand why it was ever there, and would like to remove
it (and update the Documentation file) - just to remove a little
unnecessary complication, including mem_cgroup_count_swap_user().

The file case moves account, even when the page is not mapped into
this address space, even when it's mapped into a thousand others.

Why treat the anonymous so differently here?  I'd have thought it
quite likely (by no means certain, but quite likely) that when you
move a task sharing an anon page from one cg to another, you'll
move the other task(s) sharing it immediately after - strange that
these shared pages should then get left behind.

I was pleased by the "> 2" bug, there almost all the life of
move_charge_at_immigrate, demonstrating that nobody was depending
upon the documented behaviour.

I've a few more cleanups in the swap accounting area, I guess I
should just post this change along with them and we discuss then,
unless you can enlighten me what it's about before I get there.

Thanks,
Hugh
--
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/