linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cgroup: use an ordered workqueue for cgroup destruction

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: <20140207134533.GC5121@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:	Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:45:33 +0100
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@...gle.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Markus Blank-Burian <burian@...nster.de>,
	Shawn Bohrer <shawn.bohrer@...il.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: use an ordered workqueue for cgroup destruction

On Thu 06-02-14 15:56:01, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Sometimes the cleanup after memcg hierarchy testing gets stuck in
> mem_cgroup_reparent_charges(), unable to bring non-kmem usage down to 0.
> 
> There may turn out to be several causes, but a major cause is this: the
> workitem to offline parent can get run before workitem to offline child;
> parent's mem_cgroup_reparent_charges() circles around waiting for the
> child's pages to be reparented to its lrus, but it's holding cgroup_mutex
> which prevents the child from reaching its mem_cgroup_reparent_charges().
> 
> Just use an ordered workqueue for cgroup_destroy_wq.

Hmm, interesting. Markus has seen hangs even with mem_cgroup_css_offline
and the referenced cgroup fixes, maybe this is the the right one
finally.

> Fixes: e5fca243abae ("cgroup: use a dedicated workqueue for cgroup destruction")
> Suggested-by: Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 3.10+

Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>

e5fca243abae was marked for 3.9 stable but I do not see it in the Greg's
3.9 stable branch so 3.10+ seems to be sufficient.

> ---
> 
>  kernel/cgroup.c |    4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> --- 3.14-rc1/kernel/cgroup.c	2014-02-02 18:49:07.737302111 -0800
> +++ linux/kernel/cgroup.c	2014-02-06 15:20:35.548904965 -0800
> @@ -4845,12 +4845,12 @@ static int __init cgroup_wq_init(void)
>  	/*
>  	 * There isn't much point in executing destruction path in
>  	 * parallel.  Good chunk is serialized with cgroup_mutex anyway.
> -	 * Use 1 for @max_active.
> +	 * Must be ordered to make sure parent is offlined after children.
>  	 *
>  	 * We would prefer to do this in cgroup_init() above, but that
>  	 * is called before init_workqueues(): so leave this until after.
>  	 */
> -	cgroup_destroy_wq = alloc_workqueue("cgroup_destroy", 0, 1);
> +	cgroup_destroy_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("cgroup_destroy", 0);
>  	BUG_ON(!cgroup_destroy_wq);
>  
>  	/*

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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/