linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ipc: remove memcg accounting for sops objects in do

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:13:48 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Vasily Averin <vvs@...tuozzo.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, kernel@...nvz.org,
        Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc: remove memcg accounting for sops objects in
 do_semtimedop()

On Mon 13-09-21 21:32:25, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:37 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > > However Shakeel Butt pointed that there are much more popular objects
> > > with the same life time and similar memory consumption, the accounting
> > > of which was decided to be rejected for performance reasons.
> >
> > Is there any measurable performance impact in this particular case?
> >
> 
> I don't think there was any regression report or any performance
> evaluation. Linus raised the concern on the potential performance
> impact. I suggested to backoff for this allocation for now and revisit
> again once we have improved the memcg accounting for kernel memory.

I am fine with the change, I am just not satisfied with the
justification. It is not really clear what the intention is except that
Linus wanted it. I have already asked Vasily to provide more
explanation. E.g. this part really begs for clarification
"
This object can consume up to 2 pages, syscall is sleeping one,
size and duration can be controlled by user, and this allocation
can be repeated by many thread at the same time.
"

It sounds like a problem, except it is not because? A worst case
scenario evaluation would be beneficial for example

Thanks!

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs