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: <4F971CC2.3090109@parallels.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:36:02 -0300
From:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	"Christoph Lameter" <cl@...ux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/23] kmem controller charge/uncharge infrastructure

On 04/24/2012 05:25 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> I think memcg is not necessarily wrong. That is because threads in a process
>> share an address space, and you will eventually need to map a page to deliver
>> it to userspace. The mm struct points you to the owner of that.
>>
>> But that is not necessarily true for things that live in the kernel address
>> space.
>>
>> Do you view this differently ?
>>
>
> Yes, for user memory, I see charging to p->mm->owner as allowing that
> process to eventually move and be charged to a different memcg and there's
> no way to do proper accounting if the charge is split amongst different
> memcgs because of thread membership to a set of memcgs.  This is
> consistent with charges for shared memory being moved when a thread
> mapping it moves to a new memcg, as well.

But that's the problem.

When we are dealing with kernel memory, we are allocating a whole slab 
page. It is essentially impossible to track, given a page, which task 
allocated which object.
--
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