linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure

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, 14 Aug 2012 11:58:10 -0700
From:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc:	Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/11] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure

On Mon, Aug 13 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:

>>> > +	WARN_ON(mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg));
>>> > +	size = (1 << order) << PAGE_SHIFT;
>>> > +	memcg_uncharge_kmem(memcg, size);
>>> > +	mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
>> Why do we need ref-counting here ? kmem res_counter cannot work as
>> reference ?
> This is of course the pair of the mem_cgroup_get() you commented on
> earlier. If we need one, we need the other. If we don't need one, we
> don't need the other =)
>
> The guarantee we're trying to give here is that the memcg structure will
> stay around while there are dangling charges to kmem, that we decided
> not to move (remember: moving it for the stack is simple, for the slab
> is very complicated and ill-defined, and I believe it is better to treat
> all kmem equally here)

By keeping memcg structures hanging around until the last referring kmem
page is uncharged do such zombie memcg each consume a css_id and thus
put pressure on the 64k css_id space?  I imagine in pathological cases
this would prevent creation of new cgroups until these zombies are
dereferenced.

Is there any way to see how much kmem such zombie memcg are consuming?
I think we could find these with
for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(root_mem_cgroup).  Basically, I'm wanting to
know where kernel memory has been allocated.  For live memcg, an admin
can cat memory.kmem.usage_in_bytes.  But for zombie memcg, I'm not sure
how to get this info.  It looks like the root_mem_cgroup
memory.kmem.usage_in_bytes is not hierarchically charged.
--
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/