linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] dm: use __GFP_HIGH instead PF

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: <20091118145621.3E1A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:17:54 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, dm-devel@...hat.com
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] dm: use __GFP_HIGH instead PF_MEMALLOC

Hi,

Thank you for give me comment.

> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 04:17:07PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Non MM subsystem must not use PF_MEMALLOC. Memory reclaim need few
> > memory, anyone must not prevent it. Otherwise the system cause
> > mysterious hang-up and/or OOM Killer invokation.
>  
> This code is also on the critical path, for example, if you are swapping
> onto a dm device.  (There are ways we could reduce its use further as
> not every dm ioctl needs to be on the critical path and the buffer size
> could be limited for the ioctls that do.)

May I ask one additional question?
Original code is here.

	-------------------------------------------------------
        /*
         * Trying to avoid low memory issues when a device is
         * suspended.
         */
        current->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC;

        /*
         * Copy the parameters into kernel space.
         */
        r = copy_params(user, &param);

        current->flags &= ~PF_MEMALLOC;
	-------------------------------------------------------

but PF_MEMALLOC doesn't gurantee allocation successfull. In your case,
mempoll seems better to me. copy_params seems enough small function 
and we can rewrite it. Why didn't you use mempool?

Am I missing something?


> But what situations have been causing you trouble?  The OOM killer must
> generally avoid killing userspace processes that suspend & resume dm
> devices, and there are tight restrictions on what those processes
> can do safely between suspending and resuming.

No. This is theorical issue. but I really want to avoid stress weakness
kernel.





--
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/