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]
Message-ID: <xr93aassvoco.fsf@ninji.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:	Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:53:27 -0700
From:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 1/5] memcg: disable irq at page cgroup lock

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:

> On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 13:17 -0700, Greg Thelen wrote:
>> -       lock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> +       /*
>> +        * Unless a page's cgroup reassignment is possible, then avoid grabbing
>> +        * the lock used to protect the cgroup assignment.
>> +        */
>> +       rcu_read_lock();
>
> Where is the matching barrier?

Good catch.  A call to smp_wmb() belongs in
mem_cgroup_begin_page_cgroup_reassignment() like so:

static void mem_cgroup_begin_page_cgroup_reassignment(void)
{
	VM_BUG_ON(mem_cgroup_account_move_ongoing);
	mem_cgroup_account_move_ongoing = true;
	smp_wmb();
	synchronize_rcu();
}

I'll add this to the patch.

>> +       smp_rmb();
>> +       if (unlikely(mem_cgroup_account_move_ongoing)) {
>> +               local_irq_save(flags);
>
> So the added irq-disable is a bug-fix?

The irq-disable is not needed for current code, only for upcoming
per-memcg dirty page accounting which will be refactoring
mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped() into a generic memcg stat update
routine.  I assume these locking changes should be bundled with the
dependant memcg dirty page accounting changes which need the ability to
update counters from irq routines.  I'm sorry I didn't make that more
clear.

>> +               lock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> +               locked = true;
>> +       }
>> +
>>         mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
>>         if (!mem || !PageCgroupUsed(pc))
>>                 goto done;
>> @@ -1449,6 +1468,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struct page *page, int val)
>>         /*
>>          * Preemption is already disabled. We can use __this_cpu_xxx
>>          */
>> +       VM_BUG_ON(preemptible());
>
> Insta-bug here, there is nothing guaranteeing we're not preemptible
> here.

My addition of VM_BUG_ON() was to programmatic assert what the comment
was asserting.  All callers of mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped() hold the
pte spinlock, which disables preemption.  So I don't think this
VM_BUG_ON() will cause panic.  A function level comment for
mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped() declaring that "callers must have
preemption disabled" will be added to make this more clear.

>>         if (val > 0) {
>>                 __this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_MAPPED]);
>>                 SetPageCgroupFileMapped(pc);
>> @@ -1458,7 +1478,11 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struct page *page, int val)
>>         }
>>  
>>  done:
>> -       unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> +       if (unlikely(locked)) {
>> +               unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> +               local_irq_restore(flags);
>> +       }
>> +       rcu_read_unlock();
>>  } 

--
Greg
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ