linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] mm: memcontrol: charge swap to cgroup2

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, 16 Dec 2015 12:18:30 +0900
From:	Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] mm: memcontrol: charge swap to cgroup2

On 2015/12/15 23:50, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:22:41PM +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>> On 2015/12/15 4:42, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
>>> Anyway, if you don't trust a container you'd better set the hard memory
>>> limit so that it can't hurt others no matter what it runs and how it
>>> tweaks its sub-tree knobs.
>>
>> Limiting swap can easily cause "OOM-Killer even while there are available swap"
>> with easy mistake. Can't you add "swap excess" switch to sysctl to allow global
>> memory reclaim can ignore swap limitation ?
>
> That never worked with a combined memory+swap limit, either. How could
> it? The parent might swap you out under pressure, but simply touching
> a few of your anon pages causes them to get swapped back in, thrashing
> with whatever the parent was trying to do. Your ability to swap it out
> is simply no protection against a group touching its pages.
>
> Allowing the parent to exceed swap with separate counters makes even
> less sense, because every page swapped out frees up a page of memory
> that the child can reuse. For every swap page that exceeds the limit,
> the child gets a free memory page! The child doesn't even have to
> cause swapin, it can just steal whatever the parent tried to free up,
> and meanwhile its combined memory & swap footprint explodes.
>
Sure.

> The answer is and always should have been: don't overcommit untrusted
> cgroups. Think of swap as a resource you distribute, not as breathing
> room for the parents to rely on. Because it can't and could never.
>
ok, don't overcommmit.

> And the new separate swap counter makes this explicit.
>
Hmm, my requests are
  - set the same capabilities as mlock() to set swap.limit=0
  - swap-full notification via vmpressure or something mechanism.
  - OOM-Killer's available memory calculation may be corrupted, please check.
  - force swap-in at reducing swap.limit

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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/