linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: remove rcu_read_lock from get_mem_cgroup_from

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YCEJZWJkPpvYa9Xq@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 8 Feb 2021 10:50:29 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: remove rcu_read_lock from
 get_mem_cgroup_from_page

On Fri 05-02-21 13:15:40, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 11:32:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 05-02-21 17:14:30, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 4:36 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri 05-02-21 14:27:19, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > > > The get_mem_cgroup_from_page() is called under page lock, so the page
> > > > > memcg cannot be changed under us.
> > > >
> > > > Where is the page lock enforced?
> > > 
> > > Because it is called from alloc_page_buffers(). This path is under
> > > page lock.
> > 
> > I do not see any page lock enforecement there. There is not even a
> > comment requiring that. Can we grow more users where this is not the
> > case? There is no actual relation between alloc_page_buffers and
> > get_mem_cgroup_from_page except that the former is the only _current_
> > existing user. I would be careful to dictate locking based solely on
> > that.
> 
> Since alloc_page_buffers() holds the page lock throughout the entire
> time it uses the memcg, there is no actual reason for it to use RCU or
> even acquire an additional reference on the css. We know it's pinned,
> the charge pins it, and the page lock pins the charge. It can neither
> move to a different cgroup nor be uncharged.
> 
> So what do you say we switch alloc_page_buffers() to page_memcg()?
> 
> And because that removes the last user of get_mem_cgroup_from_page(),
> we can kill it off and worry about a good interface once a consumer
> materializes for it.

Yes, this makes much more sense than impose a weird locking rules to a
more general purpose helper. Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs