linux-kernel - [PATCH -mm v15 01/13] memcg: make cache index determination more robust

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: <d3586bb61ee9b830cf2c313765e5ffc80fd4384c.1391624021.git.vdavydov@parallels.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Feb 2014 22:39:17 +0400
From:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
To:	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	<dchinner@...hat.com>, <mhocko@...e.cz>, <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	<glommer@...il.com>, <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<devel@...nvz.org>, Glauber Costa <glommer@...nvz.org>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: [PATCH -mm v15 01/13] memcg: make cache index determination more robust

From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...nvz.org>

I caught myself doing something like the following outside memcg core:

	memcg_id = -1;
	if (memcg && memcg_kmem_is_active(memcg))
		memcg_id = memcg_cache_id(memcg);

to be able to handle all possible memcgs in a sane manner. In particular, the
root cache will have kmemcg_id = -1 (just because we don't call memcg_kmem_init
to the root cache since it is not limitable). We have always coped with that by
making sure we sanitize which cache is passed to memcg_cache_id. Although this
example is given for root, what we really need to know is whether or not a
cache is kmem active.

But outside the memcg core testing for root, for instance, is not trivial since
we don't export mem_cgroup_is_root. I ended up realizing that this tests really
belong inside memcg_cache_id. This patch moves a similar but stronger test
inside memcg_cache_id and make sure it always return a meaningful value.

Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@...nvz.org>
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c |    4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 53385cd4e6f0..75758fc5c50c 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3110,7 +3110,9 @@ static void memcg_uncharge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, u64 size)
  */
 int memcg_cache_id(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
 {
-	return memcg ? memcg->kmemcg_id : -1;
+	if (!memcg || !memcg_can_account_kmem(memcg))
+		return -1;
+	return memcg->kmemcg_id;
 }

 static size_t memcg_caches_array_size(int num_groups)
-- 
1.7.10.4

--
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/