linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v4] mm: thp: remove the defer list related code since this will not happen

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2001201307520.259466@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Jan 2020 13:10:56 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Wei Yang <richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com>, hannes@...xchg.org,
        vdavydov.dev@...il.com, ktkhai@...tuozzo.com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alexander.duyck@...il.com,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v4] mm: thp: remove the defer list related code since
 this will not happen

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > When migrating memcg charges of thp memory, there are two possibilities:
> > 
> >  (1) The underlying compound page is mapped by a pmd and thus does is not 
> >      on a deferred split queue (it's mapped), or
> > 
> >  (2) The compound page is not mapped by a pmd and is awaiting split on a
> >      deferred split queue.
> > 
> > The current charge migration implementation does *not* migrate charges for 
> > thp memory on the deferred split queue, it only migrates charges for pages 
> > that are mapped by a pmd.
> > 
> > Thus, to migrate charges, the underlying compound page cannot be on a 
> > deferred split queue; no list manipulation needs to be done in 
> > mem_cgroup_move_account().
> > 
> > With the current code, the underlying compound page is moved to the 
> > deferred split queue of the memcg its memory is not charged to, so 
> > susbequent reclaim will consider these pages for the wrong memcg.  Remove 
> > the deferred split queue handling in mem_cgroup_move_account() entirely.
> 
> I believe this still doesn't describe the underlying problem to the full
> extent. What happens with the page on the deferred list when it
> shouldn't be there in fact? Unless I am missing something deferred_split_scan
> will simply split that huge page. Which is a bit unfortunate but nothing
> really critical. This should be mentioned in the changelog.
> 

Are you referring to a compound page on the deferred split queue before a 
task is moved?  I'm not sure this is within the scope of Wei's patch.. 
this is simply preventing a page from being moved to the deferred split
queue of a memcg that it is not charged to.  Is there a concern about why 
this code can be removed or a suggestion on something else it should be 
doing instead?