linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] procfs/dmabuf: Add /proc/<pid>/task/<tid>/dmabuf

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: <YBFIMIR2FXoYDd+0@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jan 2021 12:02:08 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Cc:     Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>, surenb@...gle.com,
        minchan@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, hridya@...gle.com,
        jannh@...gle.com, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com>,
        Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@...mail.de>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>, Hui Su <sh_def@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] procfs/dmabuf: Add /proc/<pid>/task/<tid>/dmabuf_fds

On Wed 27-01-21 11:53:55, Christian König wrote:
[...]
> In general processes are currently not held accountable for memory they
> reference through their file descriptors. DMA-buf is just one special case.

True

> In other words you can currently do something like this
> 
> fd = memfd_create("test", 0);
> while (1)
>     write(fd, buf, 1024);
> 
> and the OOM killer will terminate random processes, but never the one
> holding the memfd reference.

memfd is just shmem under cover, no? And that means that the memory gets
accounted to MM_SHMEMPAGES. But you are right that this in its own
doesn't help much if the fd is shared and the memory stays behind a
killed victim.

But I do agree with you that there are resources which are bound to a
process life time but the oom killer has no idea about those as they are
not accounted on a per process level and/or oom_badness doesn't take
them into consideration.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs