linux-kernel - Re: general protection fault in oom_unkillable

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]

Date:   Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:45:47 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+d0fc9d3c166bc5e4a94b@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
        yuzhoujian@...ichuxing.com
Subject: Re: general protection fault in oom_unkillable_task

On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 06:23:07 -0700 Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> wrote:

> > Here is a patch to use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS.
> >
> > From 415e52cf55bc4ad931e4f005421b827f0b02693d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 00:09:38 +0900
> > Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: Use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS at mem_cgroup_scan_tasks().
> >
> > Since commit c03cd7738a83b137 ("cgroup: Include dying leaders with live
> > threads in PROCS iterations") corrected how CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS works,
> > mem_cgroup_scan_tasks() can use CSS_TASK_ITER_PROCS in order to check
> > only one thread from each thread group.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> 
> Why not add the reproducer in the commit message?

That would be nice.

More nice would be, as always, a descriptoin of the user-visible impact
of the patch.

As I understand it, it's just a bit of a cleanup against current
mainline but without this patch in place, Shakeel's "mm, oom: refactor
dump_tasks for memcg OOMs" will cause kernel crashes.  Correct?