linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3][0/6] memcg: prevent -ENOMEM in pre

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:	Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:58:18 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Han Ying <yinghan@...gle.com>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hiroyuki Kamezawa <kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3][0/6] memcg: prevent -ENOMEM in pre_destroy()

Hello, KAME.

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 08:27:25AM +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> Remaining 20% of work is based on a modification to cgroup layer
> 
> How do you think this patch ? (This patch is not tested yet...so
> may have troubles...) I think callers of pre_destory() is not so many...
> 
> ==
> From a28db946f91f3509d25779e8c5db249506cc4b07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:38:38 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] cgroup: keep cgroup_mutex() while calling ->pre_destroy()
> 
> In past, memcg's pre_destroy() was verrry slow because of the possibility
> of page reclaiming in it. So, cgroup_mutex() was released before calling
> pre_destroy() callbacks. Now, it's enough fast. memcg just scans the list
> and move pages to other cgroup, no memory reclaim happens.
> Then, we can keep cgroup_mutex() there.
> 
> By holding looks, we can avoid following cases
>    1. new task is attached while rmdir().
>    2. new child cgroup is created while rmdir()
>    3. new task is attached to cgroup and removed from cgroup before
>       checking css's count. So, ->destroy() will be called even if
>       some trashes by the task remains
> 
> (3. is terrible case...even if I think it will not happen in real world..)

Ooh, once memcg drops the __DEPRECATED_clear_css_refs, cgroup_rmdir()
will mark the cgroup dead before start calling pre_destroy() and none
of the above will happen.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/