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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 21:36:52 -0800
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team@...com,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,slab,memcg: call memcg kmem put cache with same
 condition as get

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:01 PM Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com> wrote:
>
> There is an imbalance between when slab_pre_alloc_hook calls
> memcg_kmem_get_cache and when slab_post_alloc_hook calls
> memcg_kmem_put_cache.
>

Can you explain how there is an imbalance? If the returned kmem cache
from memcg_kmem_get_cache() is the memcg kmem cache then the refcnt of
memcg is elevated and the memcg_kmem_put_cache() will correctly
decrement the refcnt of the memcg.

> This can cause a memcg kmem cache to be destroyed right as
> an object from that cache is being allocated, which is probably
> not good. It could lead to things like a memcg allocating new
> kmalloc slabs instead of using freed space in old ones, maybe
> memory leaks, and maybe oopses as a memcg kmalloc slab is getting
> destroyed on one CPU while another CPU is trying to do an allocation
> from that same memcg.
>
> The obvious fix would be to use the same condition for calling
> memcg_kmem_put_cache that we also use to decide whether to call
> memcg_kmem_get_cache.
>
> I am not sure how long this bug has been around, since the last
> changeset to touch that code - 452647784b2f ("mm: memcontrol: cleanup
>  kmem charge functions") - merely moved the bug from one location to
> another. I am still tagging that changeset, because the fix should
> automatically apply that far back.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
> Fixes: 452647784b2f ("mm: memcontrol: cleanup kmem charge functions")
> Cc: kernel-team@...com
> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> ---
>  mm/slab.h | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h
> index 4190c24ef0e9..ab3d95bef8a0 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.h
> +++ b/mm/slab.h
> @@ -444,7 +444,8 @@ static inline void slab_post_alloc_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags,
>                 p[i] = kasan_slab_alloc(s, object, flags);
>         }
>
> -       if (memcg_kmem_enabled())
> +       if (memcg_kmem_enabled() &&
> +           ((flags & __GFP_ACCOUNT) || (s->flags & SLAB_ACCOUNT)))

I don't think these extra checks are needed. They are safe but not needed.

>                 memcg_kmem_put_cache(s);
>  }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>

thanks,
Shakeel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists