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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 28 Dec 2015 08:49:10 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <>
To:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <>
CC:	Rafael Aquini <>,
	"" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: KVM: memory ballooning bug?

On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 08:23:03PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Minchan Kim <> wrote:
> > During my compaction-related stuff, I encountered some problems with
> > ballooning.
> >
> > Firstly, with repeated inflating and deflating cycle, guest memory(ie,
> > cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemTotal) decreased and couldn't recover.
> >
> > When I review source code, balloon_lock should cover release_pages_balloon.
> > Otherwise, struct virtio_balloon fields could be overwritten by race
> > of fill_balloon(e,g, vb->*pfns could be critical).
> I guess, in original design fill and leak could be called only from single
> kernel thread which manages balloon. Seems like lock was added
> only for migration. So, locking scheme should be revisited for sure.
> Probably it's been broken by some of recent changes.

When I read git log, it seems to be broken from introdcuing
Anyway, ballooning is out of my interest. I just wanted to go ahead
my test for a long time without any problem. ;-)
If you guys want to redesign the locking scheme fully, please do.
Until that, I can go with my test with my patches I just sent.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists