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]
Message-Id: <20200102220036.228967185@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Thu,  2 Jan 2020 23:07:23 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.19 071/114] kernel: sysctl: make drop_caches write-only

From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>

[ Upstream commit 204cb79ad42f015312a5bbd7012d09c93d9b46fb ]

Currently, the drop_caches proc file and sysctl read back the last value
written, suggesting this is somehow a stateful setting instead of a
one-time command.  Make it write-only, like e.g.  compact_memory.

While mitigating a VM problem at scale in our fleet, there was confusion
about whether writing to this file will permanently switch the kernel into
a non-caching mode.  This influences the decision making in a tense
situation, where tens of people are trying to fix tens of thousands of
affected machines: Do we need a rollback strategy?  What are the
performance implications of operating in a non-caching state for several
days?  It also caused confusion when the kernel team said we may need to
write the file several times to make sure it's effective ("But it already
reads back 3?").

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191031221602.9375-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Acked-by: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Acked-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/sysctl.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
index f8576509c7be..4c4fd4339d33 100644
--- a/kernel/sysctl.c
+++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
@@ -1411,7 +1411,7 @@ static struct ctl_table vm_table[] = {
 		.procname	= "drop_caches",
 		.data		= &sysctl_drop_caches,
 		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
-		.mode		= 0644,
+		.mode		= 0200,
 		.proc_handler	= drop_caches_sysctl_handler,
 		.extra1		= &one,
 		.extra2		= &four,
-- 
2.20.1



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ