[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180130095739.GV21609@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:57:39 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Yang Shi <yang.s@...baba-inc.com>,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, guro@...com,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [netfilter-core] kernel panic: Out of memory and no killable
processes... (2)
On Tue 30-01-18 10:02:34, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:11:27AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> >> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> >> > On Mon 29-01-18 23:35:22, Florian Westphal wrote:
> >> > > Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> > > > I hate what I'm saying, but I guess we need some tunable here.
> >> > > > Not sure what exactly.
> >> > >
> >> > > Would memcg help?
> >> >
> >> > That really depends. I would have to check whether vmalloc path obeys
> >> > __GFP_ACCOUNT (I suspect it does except for page tables allocations but
> >> > that shouldn't be a big deal). But then the other potential problem is
> >> > the life time of the xt_table_info (or other potentially large) data
> >> > structures. Are they bound to any process life time.
> >>
> >> No.
> >
> > Well, IIUC they bound to net namespace life time, so killing all
> > proccesses in the namespace would help to get memory back. :)
>
> ... unless the namespace is mounted into file system.
>
> Let's start with NOWARN as that's what kernel generally uses for
> allocations with user-controllable size. ENOMEM is roughly as
> informative as the WARNING message in this case.
You want __GFP_NORETRY but that is not _fully_ supported by kvmalloc
right now. More specifically kvmalloc doesn't guanratee that the request
will not trigger the OOM killer (like regular __GFP_NORETRY). This is
because of internal vmalloc restrictions. If you are however OK to
simply bail out in most cases then __GFP_NORETRY should work reasonably
fine.
> I think we also need to consider setting up memory cgroup for
> syzkaller test processes (we do RLIMIT_AS, but that's weak).
Well, this is not about syzkaller, it merely pointed out a potential
DoS... And that has to be addressed somehow.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists