linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] hugetlb_cgroup: Add hugetlb

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, 14 Oct 2019 10:33:05 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
Cc:     Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        shuah <shuah@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        khalid.aziz@...cle.com, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] hugetlb_cgroup: Add hugetlb_cgroup reservation
 limits

On 10/11/19 1:41 PM, Mina Almasry wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:10 PM Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:47 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9/19/19 3:24 PM, Mina Almasry wrote:
>>
>> Mike, note your suggestion above to check if the page hugetlb_cgroup
>> is null doesn't work if we want to keep the current counter working
>> the same: the page will always have a hugetlb_cgroup that points that
>> contains the old counter. Any ideas how to apply this new counter
>> behavior to a private NORESERVE mappings? Is there maybe a flag I can
>> set on the pages at allocation time that I can read on free time to
>> know whether to uncharge the hugetlb_cgroup or not?
> 
> Reading the code and asking around a bit, it seems the pointer to the
> hugetlb_cgroup is in page[2].private. Is it reasonable to use
> page[3].private to store the hugetlb_cgroup to uncharge for the new
> counter and increment HUGETLB_CGROUP_MIN_ORDER to 3? I think that
> would solve my problem. When allocating a private NORESERVE page, set
> page[3].private to the hugetlb_cgroup to uncharge, then on
> free_huge_page, check page[3].private, if it is non-NULL, uncharge the
> new counter on it.

Sorry for not responding sooner.  This approach should work, and it looks like
you have a v6 of the series.  I'll take a look.

-- 
Mike Kravetz