linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: check pfmemalloc_match in slab_alloc

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: <YlKRVOgAFqdgtxDu@hyeyoo>
Date:   Sun, 10 Apr 2022 17:12:04 +0900
From:   Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>
To:     Ohhoon Kwon <ohkwon1043@...il.com>
Cc:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        JaeSang Yoo <jsyoo5b@...il.com>,
        Wonhyuk Yang <vvghjk1234@...il.com>,
        Jiyoup Kim <lakroforce@...il.com>,
        Donghyeok Kim <dthex5d@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: check pfmemalloc_match in slab_alloc_node
 fastpath

On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 01:02:23AM +0900, Ohhoon Kwon wrote:
> If current alloc context does not have __GFP_MEMALLOC in its gfpflags,
> then slab objects that were previously created with __GFP_MEMALLOC
> should not be given.
> 
> This criteria is well kept in slab alloc slowpath:
> When gfpflags does not contain __GFP_MEMALLOC but if per-cpu slab page
> was allocated with __GFP_MEMALLOC, then allocator first deactivates
> per-cpu slab page and then again allocates new slab page with the
> current context's gfpflags.
> 
> However, this criteria is not checked in fastpath.
> It should also be checked in the fastpath, too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ohhoon Kwon <ohkwon1043@...il.com>
> ---
>  mm/slub.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 74d92aa4a3a2..c77cd548e106 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -3179,7 +3179,8 @@ static __always_inline void *slab_alloc_node(struct kmem_cache *s, struct list_l
>  	 * there is a suitable cpu freelist.
>  	 */
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ||
> -	    unlikely(!object || !slab || !node_match(slab, node))) {
> +	    unlikely(!object || !slab || !node_match(slab, node) ||
> +			!pfmemalloc_match(slab, gfpflags))) {
>  		object = __slab_alloc(s, gfpflags, node, addr, c);
>  	} else {
>  		void *next_object = get_freepointer_safe(s, object);

The missing pfmemalloc check in fastpath was intended.

pfmemalloc check in fast did exist in Mel's commit 072bb0aa5e0629 ("mm:
sl[au]b: add knowledge of PFMEMALLOC reserve pages").

But later removed by Christoph's commit 5091b74a95d4 ("mm: slub: optimise
the SLUB fast path to avoid pfmemalloc checks").

Any thoughts?

Thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Hyeonggon