linux-kernel - Re: crash during oom reaper

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 18 Dec 2016 17:06:08 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: crash during oom reaper

On Sun 18-12-16 22:47:07, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2016/12/16 22:14, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > I would have to rememeber all the details. This is mostly off-topic for
> > this particular thread so I think it would be better if you could send a
> > full patch separatelly and we can discuss it there?
> > 
> 
> zap_page_range() calls mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start().
> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() calls __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start().
> __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start() calls srcu_read_lock()/srcu_read_unlock().
> This means that zap_page_range() might sleep.
> 
> I don't know what individual notifier will do, but for example
> 
>   static const struct mmu_notifier_ops i915_gem_userptr_notifier = {
>           .invalidate_range_start = i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start,
>   };
> 
> i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start() calls flush_workqueue()
> which means that we can OOM livelock if work item involves memory allocation.
> Some of other notifiers call mutex_lock()/mutex_unlock().
> 
> Even if none of currently in-tree notifier users are blocked on memory
> allocation, I think it is not guaranteed that future changes/users won't be
> blocked on memory allocation.

Kirill has sent this as a separate patchset [1]. Could you follow up on
that there please?

http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161216141556.75130-4-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs