linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH-mm v3] mm/list_lru: Optimize memcg_reparent_list_lru

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: <YkIIu7fmSKJ9YyLU@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Mar 2022 12:12:59 -0700
From:   Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-mm v3] mm/list_lru: Optimize
 memcg_reparent_list_lru_node()

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 09:06:03AM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 10:40 PM Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Since commit 2c80cd57c743 ("mm/list_lru.c: fix list_lru_count_node()
> > to be race free"), we are tracking the total number of lru
> > entries in a list_lru_node in its nr_items field.  In the case of
> > memcg_reparent_list_lru_node(), there is nothing to be done if nr_items
> > is 0.  We don't even need to take the nlru->lock as no new lru entry
> > could be added by a racing list_lru_add() to the draining src_idx memcg
> > at this point.
> 
> Hi Waiman,
> 
> Sorry for the late reply.  Quick question: what if there is an inflight
> list_lru_add()?  How about the following race?
> 
> CPU0:                               CPU1:
> list_lru_add()
>     spin_lock(&nlru->lock)
>     l = list_lru_from_kmem(memcg)
>                                     memcg_reparent_objcgs(memcg)
>                                     memcg_reparent_list_lrus(memcg)
>                                         memcg_reparent_list_lru()
>                                             memcg_reparent_list_lru_node()
>                                                 if (!READ_ONCE(nlru->nr_items))
>                                                     // Miss reparenting
>                                                     return
>     // Assume 0->1
>     l->nr_items++
>     // Assume 0->1
>     nlru->nr_items++
> 
> IIUC, we use nlru->lock to serialise this scenario.


Thank you for bringing this up, really cool race!