| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120531054316.GD24855@skywalker.linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 11:13:16 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
dhillf@...il.com, rientjes@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.cz,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V7 10/14] hugetlbfs: Add new HugeTLB cgroup
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 09:19:54PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > +static inline bool hugetlb_cgroup_have_usage(struct cgroup *cg)
> > +{
> > + int idx;
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cg = hugetlb_cgroup_from_cgroup(cg);
> > +
> > + for (idx = 0; idx < HUGE_MAX_HSTATE; idx++) {
> > + if ((res_counter_read_u64(&h_cg->hugepage[idx], RES_USAGE)) > 0)
> > + return 1;
>
> return true;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
>
> And return false here
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct cgroup_subsys_state *hugetlb_cgroup_create(struct cgroup *cgroup)
> > +{
> > + int idx;
> > + struct cgroup *parent_cgroup;
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cgroup, *parent_h_cgroup;
> > +
> > + h_cgroup = kzalloc(sizeof(*h_cgroup), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!h_cgroup)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > +
>
> No need to check cgroup for NULL?
Other cgroups (memcg) doesn't do that. Can we really get NULL cgroup tere ?
>
> > + parent_cgroup = cgroup->parent;
> > + if (parent_cgroup) {
> > + parent_h_cgroup = hugetlb_cgroup_from_cgroup(parent_cgroup);
> > + for (idx = 0; idx < HUGE_MAX_HSTATE; idx++)
> > + res_counter_init(&h_cgroup->hugepage[idx],
> > + &parent_h_cgroup->hugepage[idx]);
> > + } else {
> > + root_h_cgroup = h_cgroup;
> > + for (idx = 0; idx < HUGE_MAX_HSTATE; idx++)
> > + res_counter_init(&h_cgroup->hugepage[idx], NULL);
> > + }
> > + return &h_cgroup->css;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent(int idx, struct cgroup *cgroup,
> > + struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + int csize, ret = 0;
> > + struct page_cgroup *pc;
> > + struct res_counter *counter;
> > + struct res_counter *fail_res;
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cg = hugetlb_cgroup_from_cgroup(cgroup);
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *parent = parent_hugetlb_cgroup(cgroup);
> > +
> > + if (!get_page_unless_zero(page))
> > + goto out;
>
> Hmm, so it goes to out, and does return ret. ret is zero. Is
> that correct? Should ret be set to -EBUSY or such?
>
Fixed
> > +
> > + pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
>
> What if pc is NULL? Or is it guaranteed that it will
> never happen so?
>
> > + lock_page_cgroup(pc);
> > + if (!PageCgroupUsed(pc) || pc->cgroup != cgroup)
> > + goto err_out;
>
> err is still set to zero. Is that OK? Should it be -EINVAL
> or such?
>
Fixed
> > +
> > + csize = PAGE_SIZE << compound_order(page);
> > + /* If use_hierarchy == 0, we need to charge root */
> > + if (!parent) {
> > + parent = root_h_cgroup;
> > + /* root has no limit */
> > + res_counter_charge_nofail(&parent->hugepage[idx],
> > + csize, &fail_res);
> > + }
> > + counter = &h_cg->hugepage[idx];
> > + res_counter_uncharge_until(counter, counter->parent, csize);
> > +
> > + pc->cgroup = cgroup->parent;
> > +err_out:
> > + unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
> > + put_page(page);
> > +out:
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Force the hugetlb cgroup to empty the hugetlb resources by moving them to
> > + * the parent cgroup.
> > + */
> > +static int hugetlb_cgroup_pre_destroy(struct cgroup *cgroup)
> > +{
> > + struct hstate *h;
> > + struct page *page;
> > + int ret = 0, idx = 0;
> > +
> > + do {
> > + if (cgroup_task_count(cgroup) ||
> > + !list_empty(&cgroup->children)) {
> > + ret = -EBUSY;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + /*
> > + * If the task doing the cgroup_rmdir got a signal
> > + * we don't really need to loop till the hugetlb resource
> > + * usage become zero.
>
> Why don't we need to loop? Is somebody else (and if so can you
> say who) doing the deletion?
>
No we just come out without doing the deletion and handle the signal.
> > + */
> > + if (signal_pending(current)) {
> > + ret = -EINTR;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + for_each_hstate(h) {
> > + spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > + list_for_each_entry(page, &h->hugepage_activelist, lru) {
> > + ret = hugetlb_cgroup_move_parent(idx, cgroup, page);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > + idx++;
> > + }
> > + cond_resched();
> > + } while (hugetlb_cgroup_have_usage(cgroup));
> > +out:
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void hugetlb_cgroup_destroy(struct cgroup *cgroup)
> > +{
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cgroup;
> > +
> > + h_cgroup = hugetlb_cgroup_from_cgroup(cgroup);
> > + kfree(h_cgroup);
> > +}
> > +
> > +int hugetlb_cgroup_charge_page(int idx, unsigned long nr_pages,
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup **ptr)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > + struct res_counter *fail_res;
> > + struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cg = NULL;
> > + unsigned long csize = nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE;
> > +
> > + if (hugetlb_cgroup_disabled())
> > + goto done;
> > +again:
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + h_cg = hugetlb_cgroup_from_task(current);
> > + if (!h_cg)
> > + h_cg = root_h_cgroup;
> > +
> > + if (!css_tryget(&h_cg->css)) {
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > + goto again;
>
> You don't want some form of limit on how many times you can
> loop around?
>
you mean fail the allocation after some tries. I am not sure memcg doesn't do that.
> > + }
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> > + ret = res_counter_charge(&h_cg->hugepage[idx], csize, &fail_res);
> > + css_put(&h_cg->css);
> > +done:
> > + *ptr = h_cg;
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
>
-aneesh
--
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