linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH stable 4.6+] radix-tree: account nodes to memcg only if explicitly requested

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: <20160803081525.GF13263@esperanza>
Date:	Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:15:25 +0300
From:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	<stable@...r.kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...nel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH stable 4.6+] radix-tree: account nodes to memcg only if
 explicitly requested

On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 05:51:39AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 03:45:34PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Radix trees may be used not only for storing page cache pages, so
> > unconditionally accounting radix tree nodes to the current memory cgroup
> > is bad: if a radix tree node is used for storing data shared among
> > different cgroups we risk pinning dead memory cgroups forever. So let's
> > only account radix tree nodes if it was explicitly requested by passing
> > __GFP_ACCOUNT to INIT_RADIX_TREE. Currently, we only want to account
> > page cache entries, so mark mapping->page_tree so.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
> > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>  [4.6+]
> > ---
> >  fs/inode.c       |  2 +-
> >  lib/radix-tree.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> Is this patch in Linus's tree already?

Not yet, it should only be added to 4.8, so I shouldn't have sent this
(didn't know how patches are submitted to stable). Please ignore.

> 
> confused,

Sorry for the noise.