linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] mm: rework non-root kmem

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALvZod5dMM50pZWuOR5SN7aPPG8Zsp-+U3Y+q-UHTNo=Dgz-Nw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 May 2019 07:11:30 -0700
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] mm: rework non-root kmem_cache lifecycle management

From: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Date: Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:00 AM
To: Roman Gushchin
Cc: Andrew Morton, Shakeel Butt, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@...com>, Johannes Weiner,
Michal Hocko, Rik van Riel, Vladimir Davydov,
<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>

> On Tue, 14 May 2019, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
> > To make this possible we need to introduce a new percpu refcounter
> > for non-root kmem_caches. The counter is initialized to the percpu
> > mode, and is switched to atomic mode after deactivation, so we never
> > shutdown an active cache. The counter is bumped for every charged page
> > and also for every running allocation. So the kmem_cache can't
> > be released unless all allocations complete.
>
> Increase refcounts during each allocation? Looks to be quite heavy
> processing.

Not really, it's a percpu refcnt. Basically the memcg's
percpu_ref_tryget* is replaced with kmem_cache's percpu_ref_tryget,
so, no additional processing.