linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/4] memcg: don't call res_counter

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]

Message-ID: <20090115044557.GG21516@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:15:57 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/4] memcg: don't call res_counter_uncharge when
	obsolete

* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> [2009-01-15 13:41:14]:

> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:47:50 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> [2009-01-15 12:24:16]:
> 
> > > But I don't like -EBUSY ;)
> > > 
> > > When rmdir() returns -EBUSY even if there are no (visible) children and tasks,
> > > our customer will take kdump and send it to me "please explain this kernel bug"
> > > 
> > > I'm sure it will happen ;)
> > >
> > 
> > OK, but memory.stat can show why the group is busy and with
> > move_to_parent() such issues should not occur right? I'll relook at
> > the code. Thanks for your input.
> > 
> 
> There was a design choice at swap_cgroup.
> 
> At rmdir, there may be used swap entry in memcg. (mem->memsw.usage can be > 0)
>   1. update all records in swap cgroup
>   2. just ignore account from swap, we can treat then at swap-in.
> 
> I implemented "2" by refcnt.
> 
> To do "1", we have to scan all used swap_cgroup but I don't want to scan all
> swap_cgroup entry at rmdir. It's heavy job.
> (*) To reduce memory usage by swap_cgroup, swap_cgroup just have a pointer to memcg
> (**) I implemented swap_cgroup as statically allocated array because I don't want
>     any dynamic memory allocation at swap-out and want to avoid unnecessary memory
>     usage.

Fair enough, but I don't like that we don't have any checks for

If parent still has children, parent should not go away. The
problem that Daisuke-San is seeing.

-- 
	Balbir
--
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/