linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] fork: free vmapped stacks in cache when cpus are offline

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: <CABeRdtrq14y-vYZLVgumsZHqXfaNEux51=coYGkfLUrhyapnVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 11 Feb 2017 01:42:42 +0900
From:   Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@...il.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fork: free vmapped stacks in cache when cpus are offline

On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Fri 10-02-17 23:31:41, Hoeun Ryu wrote:
>> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > > On Fri 10-02-17 17:32:07, Hoeun Ryu wrote:
>> [...]
>> > >>  static unsigned long *alloc_thread_stack_node(struct task_struct *tsk, int node)
>> > >> @@ -456,6 +474,11 @@ void __init fork_init(void)
>> > >>       for (i = 0; i < UCOUNT_COUNTS; i++) {
>> > >>               init_user_ns.ucount_max[i] = max_threads/2;
>> > >>       }
>> > >> +
>> > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
>> > >> +     cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "vm_stack_cache",
>> > >> +                       NULL, free_vm_stack_cache);
>> > >> +#endif
>> > >
>> > > I am not familiar the new hotplug infrastructure so I might be missing
>> > > something. CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN will allocate a state which is has only
>> > > 30 slots available. The name also suggests this will be called on an
>> > > online event. Why doesn't this have its own state like other users. The
>> > > name should also reflect offline event CPUHP_STACK_CACHE_DEAD or
>> > > something like that.
>> >
>> > I'll define CPUHP_VMSTACK_CACHE_DEAD before CPUHP_BP_PREPARE_DYN in
>> > cpuhotplug.h.
>> > Do you think the change is made in a separate patch or not ?
>>
>> I think it should be in a single patch. I am not sure what are the rules
>> to define a new state though. Let's CC Thomas.
>
> So the first question is where do you want that to be called? i.e. in which
> section:
>
> CPU up          CPU down
>
> PREPARE         DEAD            <- called on some other CPU
> ONLINE          DOWN            <- called on the hotplugged CPU
>

It doesn't matter whether the callback is called on the hotplugged CPU
or other CPUs.

> And then the next question is whether you have ordering constraints,
> i.e. it must be called before or after some other callback. Only in that
> case you want to have an explicit state. If not, just use a dynamically
> allocated one.

The cache is for virtually mapped kernel stacks. so I think the
callback should be called after all tasks are migrated to other CPUs.
It must reside before CPUHP_AP_SCHED_STARTING or CPUHP_BRINGUP_CPU.

>
> Thanks,
>
>         tglx