linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: prevent a race between process_mrelease and exit

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: <CAJuCfpFX8FRynoK29h8tpRXRT-Kk+sHboiBnc7N-8MY6AAqVLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Nov 2021 08:14:43 -0700
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: prevent a race between process_mrelease and exit_mmap

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 12:58 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon 01-11-21 08:44:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm with you on this one, that's why I wanted to measure the price we
> > would pay. Below are the test results:
> >
> > Test: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20170725142626.GJ26723@dhcp22.suse.cz/
> > Compiled: gcc -O2 -static test.c -o test
> > Test machine: 128 core / 256 thread 2x AMD EPYC 7B12 64-Core Processor
> > (family 17h)
> >
> > baseline (Linus master, f31531e55495ca3746fb895ffdf73586be8259fa)
> > p50 (median)   87412
> > p95                  168210
> > p99                  190058
> > average           97843.8
> > stdev               29.85%
> >
> > unconditional mmap_write_lock in exit_mmap (last column is the change
> > from the baseline)
> > p50 (median)   88312     +1.03%
> > p95                  170797   +1.54%
> > p99                  191813   +0.92%
> > average           97659.5  -0.19%
> > stdev               32.41%
> >
> > unconditional mmap_write_lock in exit_mmap + Matthew's patch (last
> > column is the change from the baseline)
> > p50 (median)   88807      +1.60%
> > p95                  167783     -0.25%
> > p99                  187853     -1.16%
> > average           97491.4    -0.36%
> > stdev               30.61%
> >
> > stdev is quite high in all cases, so the test is very noisy.
> > The impact seems quite low IMHO. WDYT?
>
> Results being very noisy is what I recall as well. Thanks!

I believe, despite the noise, the percentiles show that overall we do
not noticeably regress the exit path by taking mmap_lock
unconditionally.
If there are no objections, I would like to post a patchset which
implements unconditional locking in exit_mmap() and process_madvise()
calling __oom_reap_task_mm() under protection of read mmap_lock.
Thanks!

> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs