[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120626133838.GA11519@somewhere.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:38:41 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...hat.com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, devel@...nvz.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] protect architectures where THREAD_SIZE >=
PAGE_SIZE against fork bombs
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:48:08PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 06/25/2012 10:38 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 06:55:35PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>On 06/25/2012 04:15 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >>
> >>>Because those architectures will draw their stacks directly from
> >>>the page allocator, rather than the slab cache, we can directly
> >>>pass __GFP_KMEMCG flag, and issue the corresponding free_pages.
> >>>
> >>>This code path is taken when the architecture doesn't define
> >>>CONFIG_ARCH_THREAD_INFO_ALLOCATOR (only ia64 seems to), and has
> >>>THREAD_SIZE >= PAGE_SIZE. Luckily, most - if not all - of the
> >>>remaining architectures fall in this category.
> >>>
> >>>This will guarantee that every stack page is accounted to the memcg
> >>>the process currently lives on, and will have the allocations to fail
> >>>if they go over limit.
> >>>
> >>>For the time being, I am defining a new variant of THREADINFO_GFP, not
> >>>to mess with the other path. Once the slab is also tracked by memcg,
> >>>we can get rid of that flag.
> >>>
> >>>Tested to successfully protect against :(){ :|:& };:
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
> >>>CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
> >>>CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
> >>>CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
> >>>CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> >>>CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> >>>CC: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...hat.com>
> >
> >Frederic, does this (with proper slab accounting added later) achieve
> >what you wanted with the task counter?
> >
>
> A note: Frederic may confirm, but I think he doesn't even need
> the slab accounting to follow to achieve that goal.
Limiting is enough. But that requires internal accounting.
--
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