linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Use GFP_KERNEL allocation for the page cache in page_cache

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: <20150318154540.GN17241@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 18 Mar 2015 16:45:40 +0100
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	Sage Weil <sage@...tank.com>, Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Use GFP_KERNEL allocation for the page cache in
 page_cache_read

What do you think about this v2? I cannot say I would like it but I
really dislike the whole mapping_gfp_mask API to be honest.
---
>From d88010d6f5f59d7eb87b691e27e201d12cab9141 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 16:06:40 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] mm: Allow __GFP_FS for page_cache_read page cache allocation

page_cache_read has been historically using page_cache_alloc_cold to
allocate a new page. This means that mapping_gfp_mask is used as the
base for the gfp_mask. Many filesystems are setting this mask to
GFP_NOFS to prevent from fs recursion issues. page_cache_read is,
however, not called from the fs layer so it doesn't need this
protection. Even ceph and ocfs2 which call filemap_fault from their
fault handlers seem to be OK because they are not taking any fs lock
before invoking generic implementation.

The protection might be even harmful. There is a strong push to fail
GFP_NOFS allocations rather than loop within allocator indefinitely with
a very limited reclaim ability. Once we start failing those requests
the OOM killer might be triggered prematurely because the page cache
allocation failure is propagated up the page fault path and end up in
pagefault_out_of_memory.

Add __GFP_FS and __GFPIO to the gfp mask which is coming from the
mapping to fix this issue.

Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
---
 mm/filemap.c | 10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 968cd8e03d2e..8b50d5eb52b2 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -1752,7 +1752,15 @@ static int page_cache_read(struct file *file, pgoff_t offset)
 	int ret;

 	do {
-		page = page_cache_alloc_cold(mapping);
+		gfp_t page_cache_gfp = mapping_gfp_mask(mapping)|__GFP_COLD;
+
+		/*
+		 * This code is not called from the fs layer so we do not need
+		 * reclaim recursion protection. !GFP_FS might fail too easy
+		 * and trigger OOM killer prematuraly.
+		 */
+		page_cache_gfp |= __GFP_FS | __GFP_IO;
+		page = __page_cache_alloc(page_cache_gfp);
 		if (!page)
 			return -ENOMEM;

-- 
2.1.4

-- 
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/