linux-kernel - Re: [rfc patch] sched/topology: fix domain reconstruction memory leakage

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: <1503322229.25589.183.camel@gmx.de>
Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2017 15:30:29 +0200
From:   Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc patch] sched/topology: fix domain reconstruction memory
 leakage

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 10:16 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 08:10:49AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > While beating on cpu hotplug with the shiny new topology fixes
> > backported, my memory poor 8 socket box fairly quickly leaked itself to
> > death, 0c0e776a9b0f being the culprit.  With the below applied, box
> > took a severe beating overnight without a whimper.
> > 
> > I'm wondering (ergo rfc) if free_sched_groups() shouldn't be renamed to
> > put_sched_groups() instead, with overlapping domains taking a group
> > reference reference as well so they can put both sg/sgc rather than put
> > one free the other.  Those places that want an explicit free can pass
> > free to only explicitly free sg (or use two functions).  Minimalist
> > approach works (minus signs, yay), but could perhaps use some "pretty".
> > 
> > sched/topology: fix domain reconstruction memory leakage
> 
> I was sitting on this one:
> 
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git/commit/?h=sched/core&id=c63d18dd6ea59eec5cba857835f788943ff9f0d5

The comment in the patch reads better to me like so:

@@ -345,15 +346,12 @@ static void free_sched_groups(struct sch
 static void destroy_sched_domain(struct sched_domain *sd)
 {
 	/*
-	 * If its an overlapping domain it has private groups, iterate and
-	 * nuke them all.
+	 * A normal sched domain may have multiple group references, an
+	 * overlapping domain, having private groups, only one.  Iterate,
+	 * dropping group/capacity references, freeing where none remain.
 	 */
-	if (sd->flags & SD_OVERLAP) {
-		free_sched_groups(sd->groups, 1);
-	} else if (atomic_dec_and_test(&sd->groups->ref)) {
-		kfree(sd->groups->sgc);
-		kfree(sd->groups);
-	}
+	free_sched_groups(sd->groups, 1);
+
 	if (sd->shared && atomic_dec_and_test(&sd->shared->ref))
 		kfree(sd->shared);
 	kfree(sd);