linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] After swapout/swapin private dirty mappings become clean

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: <201009151159.16140.knikanth@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:59:16 +0530
From:	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, rguenther@...ell.com, matz@...ell.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] After swapout/swapin private dirty mappings become clean

On Wednesday 15 September 2010 10:45:28 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > On Wednesday 15 September 2010 10:16:36 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 15 September 2010 05:54:31 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > > > /proc/$pid/smaps broken: After swapout/swapin private dirty
> > > > > > mappings become clean.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When a page with private file mapping becomes dirty, the vma will
> > > > > > be in both i_mmap tree and anon_vma list. The /proc/$pid/smaps
> > > > > > will account these pages as dirty and backed by the file.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But when those dirty pages gets swapped out, and when they are
> > > > > > read back from swap, they would be marked as clean, as it should
> > > > > > be, as they are part of swap cache now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But the /proc/$pid/smaps would report the vma as a mapping of a
> > > > > > file and it is clean. The pages are actually in same state i.e.,
> > > > > > dirty with respect to file still, but which was once reported as
> > > > > > dirty is now being reported as clean to user-space.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This confuses tools like gdb which uses this information. Those
> > > > > > tools think that those pages were never modified and it creates
> > > > > > problem when they create dumps.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The file mapping of the vma also cannot be broken as pages never
> > > > > > read earlier, will still have to come from the file. Just that
> > > > > > those dirty pages have become clean anonymous pages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > During swaping in, restoring the exact state as dirty file-backed
> > > > > > pages before swapout would be useless, as there in no real bug.
> > > > > > Breaking the vma with only anonymous pages as seperate vmas
> > > > > > unnecessary may not be a good thing as well. So let us just
> > > > > > export the information that a file-backed vma has anonymous dirty
> > > > > > pages.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why can't gdb check Swap: field in smaps? I think Swap!=0 mean we
> > > > > need dump out.
> > > >
> > > > Yes. When the page is swapped out it is accounted in "Swap:".
> > > >
> > > > > Am I missing anything?
> > > >
> > > > But when it gets swapped in back to memory, it is removed from
> > > > "Swap:" and added to "Private_Clean:" instead of "Private_Dirty:".
> > >
> > > Here is the code.
> > > I think the page will become dirty, again.
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > int try_to_free_swap(struct page *page)
> > > {
> > >         VM_BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
> > >
> > >         if (!PageSwapCache(page))
> > >                 return 0;
> > >         if (PageWriteback(page))
> > >                 return 0;
> > >         if (page_swapcount(page))
> > >                 return 0;
> > >
> > >         delete_from_swap_cache(page);
> > >         SetPageDirty(page);
> > >         return 1;
> > > }
> >
> > I think this gets called only when the swap space gets freed.
> 
> this is try-to-free-swap-space.
> delete_from_swap_cache() does actual free.
> 
> > But when the
> > page is just swapped out and swapped in, and the page is still part of
> > SwapCache, it will be marked as clean, when the I/O read from swap
> > completes.
> 
> Because in this case, the swap entry is not freed yet. Then the page is
>  still clean and swap field is still !0.
> 
> PageSwapCache == the page has backend swap entry == the page may be clean.
> But, When the swap entry is removed, page will become dirty again.
> 

Correct.

> As I said, following is incorrect.

No.

> In almost case, swap entry is not
>  removed at swap-in. Please grep try_to_free_swap() callers and
> 

Correct

> > > > But when it gets swapped in back to memory, it is removed from
> > > > "Swap:"
> 

I mean the "Swap:" field in smaps file here, not the swapcache.

Thanks
Nikanth
--
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/