linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/2] mm: Uncharge poisoned pages

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: <20170424090530.GA31900@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
Date:   Mon, 24 Apr 2017 09:05:31 +0000
From:   Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
To:     Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] mm: Uncharge poisoned pages

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:26:01AM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> When page are poisoned, they should be uncharged from the root memory
> cgroup.

Could you include some information about what problem this patch tries
to solve?
# I know that you already explain it in patch 0/2, so you can simply
# copy from it.

>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  mm/memory-failure.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 27f7210e7fab..00bd39d3d4cb 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -530,6 +530,7 @@ static const char * const action_page_types[] = {
>  static int delete_from_lru_cache(struct page *p)
>  {
>  	if (!isolate_lru_page(p)) {
> +		memcg_kmem_uncharge(p, 0);

This function is supposed to be called with if (memcg_kmem_enabled()) check,
so could you do like below?

+		if (memcg_kmem_enabled())
+			memcg_kmem_uncharge(p, 0);

And I feel that we can call this function outside if (!isolate_lru_page(p))
block, because isolate_lru_page could fail and then the error page is left
incompletely isolated. Such error page has PageHWPoison set, so I guess that
the reported bug still triggers on such case.

Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi