[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090509040418.GA29306@eskimo.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 21:04:18 -0700
From: Elladan <elladan@...imo.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Elladan <elladan@...imo.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] vmscan: make mapped executable pages the first
class citizen
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 12:04:27PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Elladan wrote:
>
>>> Nobody (except you) is proposing that we completely disable
>>> the eviction of executable pages. I believe that your idea
>>> could easily lead to a denial of service attack, with a user
>>> creating a very large executable file and mmaping it.
>>>
>>> Giving executable pages some priority over other file cache
>>> pages is nowhere near as dangerous wrt. unexpected side effects
>>> and should work just as well.
>>
>> I don't think this sort of DOS is relevant for a single user or trusted user
>> system.
>
> Which not all systems are, meaning that the mechanism
> Christoph proposes can never be enabled by default and
> would have to be tweaked by the user.
>
> I prefer code that should work just as well 99% of the
> time, but can be enabled by default for everybody.
> That way people automatically get the benefit.
I read Christopher's proposal as essentially, "have a desktop switch which
won't evict executable pages unless they're using more than some huge
percentage of RAM" (presumably, he wants anonymous pages to get special
treatment too) -- this would essentially be similar to mlocking all your
executables, only with a safety net if you go above x% and without affecting
non-executable file maps.
Given that, the DOS possibility you proposed seemed to just be one where a user
could push a lot of unprotected pages out quickly and make the system run slow.
I don't see how that's any different than just asking malloc() for a lot of ram
and then touching it a lot to make it appear very hot to the VM. Any user can
trivially do that already, and some apps (eg. a jvm) happily do that for you.
The pathology is the same, and if anything an executable mmap is harder.
-E
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists