linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback, memcg: Implement foreign dirty flushing

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:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 10:31:48 -0700
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, hannes@...xchg.org, mhocko@...nel.org,
        vdavydov.dev@...il.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com, guro@...com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback, memcg: Implement foreign dirty flushing

Hello, Jan.

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:34:04PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> I have to say I'm a bit nervous about the completely lockless handling
> here. I understand that garbage in the cgwb_frn will just result in this
> mechanism not working and possibly flushing wrong wb's but still it seems a
> bit fragile. But I don't see any cheap way of synchronizing this so I guess
> let's try how this will work in practice.

Yeah, this approach is fundamentally best-effort, so I went for low
overhead and mostly correct operation.  If something like this doesn't
cut it (w/ bug fixes and some polishing over time), my gut feeling is
that we probably should bite the bullet and synchronize cgroup memory
and inode ownerships rather than pushing further on inherently
imprecise mitigation mechanisms.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun