| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <46998d10-d0ca-aeeb-8dcd-41b8130fb756@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 19:29:20 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: mhocko@...nel.org, mhocko@...e.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
willy@...radead.org, hannes@...xchg.org, guro@...com,
riel@...riel.com, minchan@...nel.org, christian@...uner.io,
hch@...radead.org, oleg@...hat.com, jannh@...gle.com,
shakeelb@...gle.com, luto@...nel.org, christian.brauner@...ntu.com,
fweimer@...hat.com, jengelh@...i.de, timmurray@...gle.com,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] mm: introduce process_mrelease system call
On 05.08.21 19:08, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> In modern systems it's not unusual to have a system component monitoring
> memory conditions of the system and tasked with keeping system memory
> pressure under control. One way to accomplish that is to kill
> non-essential processes to free up memory for more important ones.
> Examples of this are Facebook's OOM killer daemon called oomd and
> Android's low memory killer daemon called lmkd.
> For such system component it's important to be able to free memory
> quickly and efficiently. Unfortunately the time process takes to free
> up its memory after receiving a SIGKILL might vary based on the state
> of the process (uninterruptible sleep), size and OPP level of the core
> the process is running. A mechanism to free resources of the target
> process in a more predictable way would improve system's ability to
> control its memory pressure.
> Introduce process_mrelease system call that releases memory of a dying
> process from the context of the caller. This way the memory is freed in
> a more controllable way with CPU affinity and priority of the caller.
> The workload of freeing the memory will also be charged to the caller.
> The operation is allowed only on a dying process.
>
> After previous discussions [1, 2, 3] the decision was made [4] to introduce
> a dedicated system call to cover this use case.
>
> The API is as follows,
>
> int process_mrelease(int pidfd, unsigned int flags);
>
> DESCRIPTION
> The process_mrelease() system call is used to free the memory of
> an exiting process.
>
> The pidfd selects the process referred to by the PID file
> descriptor.
> (See pidfd_open(2) for further information)
>
> The flags argument is reserved for future use; currently, this
> argument must be specified as 0.
>
> RETURN VALUE
> On success, process_mrelease() returns 0. On error, -1 is
> returned and errno is set to indicate the error.
>
> ERRORS
> EBADF pidfd is not a valid PID file descriptor.
>
> EAGAIN Failed to release part of the address space.
>
> EINTR The call was interrupted by a signal; see signal(7).
>
> EINVAL flags is not 0.
>
> EINVAL The memory of the task cannot be released because the
> process is not exiting, the address space is shared
> with another live process or there is a core dump in
> progress.
>
> ENOSYS This system call is not supported, for example, without
> MMU support built into Linux.
>
> ESRCH The target process does not exist (i.e., it has terminated
> and been waited on).
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190411014353.113252-3-surenb@google.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201113173448.1863419-1-surenb@google.com/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201124053943.1684874-3-surenb@google.com/
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/20201223075712.GA4719@lst.de/
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> ---
> changes in v7:
> - Fixed pidfd_open misspelling, per Andrew Morton
> - Fixed wrong task pinning after find_lock_task_mm() issue, per Michal Hocko
> - Moved MMF_OOM_SKIP check before task_will_free_mem(), per Michal Hocko
>
> mm/oom_kill.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index c729a4c4a1ac..a4d917b43c73 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> #include <linux/sched/debug.h>
> #include <linux/swap.h>
> +#include <linux/syscalls.h>
> #include <linux/timex.h>
> #include <linux/jiffies.h>
> #include <linux/cpuset.h>
> @@ -1141,3 +1142,75 @@ void pagefault_out_of_memory(void)
> out_of_memory(&oc);
> mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
> }
> +
> +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(process_mrelease, int, pidfd, unsigned int, flags)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> + struct mm_struct *mm = NULL;
> + struct task_struct *task;
> + struct task_struct *p;
> + unsigned int f_flags;
> + struct pid *pid;
> + long ret = 0;
> +
> + if (flags)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + pid = pidfd_get_pid(pidfd, &f_flags);
> + if (IS_ERR(pid))
> + return PTR_ERR(pid);
> +
> + task = get_pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID);
> + if (!task) {
> + ret = -ESRCH;
> + goto put_pid;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * If the task is dying and in the process of releasing its memory
> + * then get its mm.
> + */
> + p = find_lock_task_mm(task);
> + if (!p) {
> + ret = -ESRCH;
> + goto put_pid;
> + }
> + if (task != p) {
> + get_task_struct(p);
Wouldn't we want to obtain the mm from p ? I thought that was the whole
exercise of going via find_lock_task_mm().
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists