| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20170223151232.GC29056@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:12:33 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/cgroup: avoid panic when init with low memory
On Thu 23-02-17 14:36:38, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> The system may panic when initialisation is done when almost all the
> memory is assigned to the huge pages using the kernel command line
> parameter hugepage=xxxx. Panic may occur like this:
>
> [ 0.082289] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00000000
> [ 0.082338] Faulting instruction address: 0xc000000000302b88
> [ 0.082377] Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1]
> [ 0.082408] SMP NR_CPUS=2048 [ 0.082424] NUMA
> [ 0.082440] pSeries
> [ 0.082457] Modules linked in:
> [ 0.082490] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.9.0-15-generic #16-Ubuntu
> [ 0.082536] task: c00000021ed01600 task.stack: c00000010d108000
> [ 0.082575] NIP: c000000000302b88 LR: c000000000270e04 CTR: c00000000016cfd0
> [ 0.082621] REGS: c00000010d10b2c0 TRAP: 0300 Not tainted (4.9.0-15-generic)
> [ 0.082666] MSR: 8000000002009033 <SF,VEC,EE,ME,IR,DR,RI,LE>[ 0.082770] CR: 28424422 XER: 00000000
> [ 0.082793] CFAR: c0000000003d28b8 DAR: 0000000000000000 DSISR: 40000000 SOFTE: 1
> GPR00: c000000000270e04 c00000010d10b540 c00000000141a300 c00000010fff6300
> GPR04: 0000000000000000 00000000026012c0 c00000010d10b630 0000000487ab0000
> GPR08: 000000010ee90000 c000000001454fd8 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> GPR12: 0000000000004400 c00000000fb80000 00000000026012c0 00000000026012c0
> GPR16: 00000000026012c0 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000002
> GPR20: 000000000000000c 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000024200c0
> GPR24: c0000000016eef48 0000000000000000 c00000010fff7d00 00000000026012c0
> GPR28: 0000000000000000 c00000010fff7d00 c00000010fff6300 c00000010d10b6d0
> NIP [c000000000302b88] mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim+0xf8/0x4f0
> [ 0.083456] LR [c000000000270e04] do_try_to_free_pages+0x1b4/0x450
> [ 0.083494] Call Trace:
> [ 0.083511] [c00000010d10b540] [c00000010d10b640] 0xc00000010d10b640 (unreliable)
> [ 0.083567] [c00000010d10b610] [c000000000270e04] do_try_to_free_pages+0x1b4/0x450
> [ 0.083622] [c00000010d10b6b0] [c000000000271198] try_to_free_pages+0xf8/0x270
> [ 0.083676] [c00000010d10b740] [c000000000259dd8] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x7a8/0xff0
> [ 0.083729] [c00000010d10b960] [c0000000002dd274] new_slab+0x104/0x8e0
> [ 0.083776] [c00000010d10ba40] [c0000000002e03d0] ___slab_alloc+0x620/0x700
> [ 0.083822] [c00000010d10bb70] [c0000000002e04e4] __slab_alloc+0x34/0x60
> [ 0.083868] [c00000010d10bba0] [c0000000002e101c] kmem_cache_alloc_node_trace+0xdc/0x310
> [ 0.083947] [c00000010d10bc00] [c000000000eb8120] mem_cgroup_init+0x158/0x1c8
> [ 0.083994] [c00000010d10bc40] [c00000000000dde8] do_one_initcall+0x68/0x1d0
> [ 0.084041] [c00000010d10bd00] [c000000000e84184] kernel_init_freeable+0x278/0x360
> [ 0.084094] [c00000010d10bdc0] [c00000000000e714] kernel_init+0x24/0x170
> [ 0.084143] [c00000010d10be30] [c00000000000c0e8] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x74
> [ 0.084195] Instruction dump:
> [ 0.084220] eb81ffe0 eba1ffe8 ebc1fff0 ebe1fff8 4e800020 3d230001 e9499a42 3d220004
> [ 0.084300] 3929acd8 794a1f24 7d295214 eac90100 <e9360000> 2fa90000 419eff74 3b200000
> [ 0.084382] ---[ end trace 342f5208b00d01b6 ]---
>
> This is a chicken and egg issue where the kernel try to get free
> memory when allocating per node data in mem_cgroup_init(), but in that
> path mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim() is called which assumes that
> these data are allocated.
>
> As mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim() is best effort, it should return
> when these data are not yet allocated.
>
> This patch also fixes potential null pointer access in
> mem_cgroup_remove_from_trees() and mem_cgroup_update_tree().
>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Thanks!
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 45867e439d31..a9f10fde44a6 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -465,6 +465,8 @@ static void mem_cgroup_update_tree(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct page *page)
> struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_node *mctz;
>
> mctz = soft_limit_tree_from_page(page);
> + if (!mctz)
> + return;
> /*
> * Necessary to update all ancestors when hierarchy is used.
> * because their event counter is not touched.
> @@ -502,7 +504,8 @@ static void mem_cgroup_remove_from_trees(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> for_each_node(nid) {
> mz = mem_cgroup_nodeinfo(memcg, nid);
> mctz = soft_limit_tree_node(nid);
> - mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mz, mctz);
> + if (mctz)
> + mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mz, mctz);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -2557,7 +2560,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order,
> * is empty. Do it lockless to prevent lock bouncing. Races
> * are acceptable as soft limit is best effort anyway.
> */
> - if (RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&mctz->rb_root))
> + if (!mctz || RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&mctz->rb_root))
> return 0;
>
> /*
> --
> 2.7.4
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists