linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio_balloon: disable oom killer when fill balloon

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]

Date:	Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:38:16 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio_balloon: disable oom killer when fill balloon

> When memory pressure is high, virtio ballooning will probably cause oom killing.
> Even if alloc_page with GFP_NORETRY itself does not directly trigger oom it
> will make memory becoming low then memory alloc of other processes will trigger
> oom killing. It is not desired behaviour.
> 
> Here disable oom killer in fill_balloon to address this issue.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/virtio/virtio_balloon.c |    3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/virtio/virtio_balloon.c	2010-10-13 10:14:38.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/virtio/virtio_balloon.c	2011-04-26 11:38:43.979785141 +0800
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  #include <linux/freezer.h>
>  #include <linux/delay.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/oom.h>
>  
>  struct virtio_balloon
>  {
> @@ -102,6 +103,7 @@ static void fill_balloon(struct virtio_b
>  	/* We can only do one array worth at a time. */
>  	num = min(num, ARRAY_SIZE(vb->pfns));
>  
> +	oom_killer_disable();

I think this patch need proper comment at least. My first impression
is, "Hm, __GFP_NORETRY should prevent oom, why is this necessary?".
So, this actually prevent _another_ thread call out_of_memory().
Also, Here doesn't have any exclusion against hibernation (ie another
oom_killer_disable() callsite). It should be described why lock is 
unnecessary.

Thanks.


>  	for (vb->num_pfns = 0; vb->num_pfns < num; vb->num_pfns++) {
>  		struct page *page = alloc_page(GFP_HIGHUSER | __GFP_NORETRY |
>  					__GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN);
> @@ -119,6 +121,7 @@ static void fill_balloon(struct virtio_b
>  		vb->num_pages++;
>  		list_add(&page->lru, &vb->pages);
>  	}
> +	oom_killer_enable();
>  
>  	/* Didn't get any?  Oh well. */
>  	if (vb->num_pfns == 0)
> --
> 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/



--
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/