linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm: memcg/slab: Stop reparented obj

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: <CALvZod45mAzyo9LNR4YtX_3J0gZJDagYTNv8NbJAuXzwK5A2DA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:56:51 -0700
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     rpalethorpe@...e.de
Cc:     Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: memcg/slab: Stop reparented obj_cgroups from
 charging root

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 6:49 AM Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@...e.de> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@...e.de> writes:
>
> > Hello Shakeel,
> >
> > Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>> V3: Handle common case where use_hierarchy=1 and update description.
> >>>
> >>>  mm/memcontrol.c | 7 +++++--
> >>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> >>> index 6877c765b8d0..34b8c4a66853 100644
> >>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> >>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> >>> @@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ static void obj_cgroup_release(struct percpu_ref *ref)
> >>>
> >>>         spin_lock_irqsave(&css_set_lock, flags);
> >>>         memcg = obj_cgroup_memcg(objcg);
> >>> -       if (nr_pages)
> >>> +       if (nr_pages && (!mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg) || memcg->use_hierarchy))
> >>
> >> If we have non-root memcg with use_hierarchy as 0 and this objcg was
> >> reparented then this __memcg_kmem_uncharge() can potentially underflow
> >> the page counter and give the same warning.
> >
> > Yes, although the kernel considers such a config to be broken, and
> > prints a warning to the log, it does allow it.
>
> Actually this can not happen because if use_hierarchy=0 then the objcg
> will be reparented to root.
>

Yup, you are right. I do wonder if we should completely deprecate
use_hierarchy=0.