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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:22:32 +0200 From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com> To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> Cc: Vasily Averin <vvs@...nvz.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>, kernel@...nvz.org, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg v4] net: set proper memcg for net_init hooks allocations On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:23:32PM -0700, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> wrote: > [...] > > > > +static inline struct mem_cgroup *get_mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p) > > +{ > > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg; > > + > > Do we need memcg_kmem_enabled() check here or maybe > mem_cgroup_from_obj() should be doing memcg_kmem_enabled() instead of > mem_cgroup_disabled() as we can have "cgroup.memory=nokmem" boot > param. I reckon such a guard is on the charge side and readers should treat NULL and root_mem_group equally. Or is there a case when these two are different? (I can see it's different semantics when stored in current->active_memcg (and active_memcg() getter) but for such "outer" callers like here it seems equal.) Regards, Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists