linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm/vmalloc: Cache the /proc/meminfo vmalloc statistics

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150823044839.5727.qmail@ns.horizon.com>
Date:	23 Aug 2015 00:48:39 -0400
From:	"George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To:	mingo@...nel.org
Cc:	linux@...izon.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm/vmalloc: Cache the /proc/meminfo vmalloc statistics

Linus wrote:
> I don't think any of this can be called "correct", in that the
> unlocked accesses to the cached state are clearly racy, but I think
> it's very much "acceptable".

I'd think you could easily fix that with a seqlock-like system.

What makes it so simple is that you can always fall back to
calc_vmalloc_info if there's any problem, rather than looping or blocking.

The basic idea is that you have a seqlock counter, but if either of
the two lsbits are set, the cached information is stale.

Basically, you need a seqlock and a spinlock.  The seqlock does
most of the work, and the spinlock ensures that there's only one
updater of the cache.

vmap_unlock() does set_bit(0, &seq->sequence).  This marks the information
as stale.

get_vmalloc_info reads the seqlock.  There are two case:
- If the two lsbits are 10, the cached information is valid.
  Copy it out, re-check the seqlock, and loop if the sequence
  number changes.
- In any other case, the cached information is
  not valid.
  - Try to obtain the spinlock.  Do not block if it's unavailable.
    - If unavailable, do not block.
    - If the lock is acquired:
      - Set the sequence to (sequence | 3) + 1 (we're the only writer)
      - This bumps the sequence number and leaves the lsbits at 00 (invalid)
      - Memory barrier TBD.  Do the RCU ops in calc_vmalloc_info do it for us?
  - Call calc_vmalloc_info
  - If we obtained the spinlock earlier:
    - Copy our vmi to cached_info
    - smp_wmb()
    - set_bit(1, &seq->sequence).  This marks the information as valid,
      as long as bit 0 is still clear.
    - Release the spinlock.

Basically, bit 0 says "vmalloc info has changed", and bit 1 says
"vmalloc cache has been updated".  This clears bit 0 before
starting the update so that an update during calc_vmalloc_info
will force a new update.

So the three case are basically:
00 - calc_vmalloc_info() in progress
01 - vmap_unlock() during calc_vmalloc_info()
10 - cached_info is valid
11 - vmap_unlock has invalidated cached_info, awaiting refresh

Logically, the sequence number should be initialized to ...01,
but the code above handles 00 okay.
--
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/