linux-kernel - [QUESTION] memcg page_counter seems broken in MADV

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8a2f2644-71d0-05d7-49d8-878aafa99652@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 26 Nov 2022 21:09:51 +0800
From:   Yongqiang Liu <liuyongqiang13@...wei.com>
To:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
CC:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <aarcange@...hat.com>, <hughd@...gle.com>, <mgorman@...e.de>,
        <mhocko@...e.cz>, <cl@...two.org>, <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
        <zokeefe@...gle.com>, <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, <peterx@...hat.com>,
        "Wangkefeng (OS Kernel Lab)" <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        "zhangxiaoxu (A)" <zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com>,
        <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yongqiang Liu <liuyongqiang13@...wei.com>,
        Lu Jialin <lujialin4@...wei.com>
Subject: [QUESTION] memcg page_counter seems broken in MADV_DONTNEED with THP
 enabled

Hi,

We use mm_counter to how much a process physical memory used. Meanwhile,
page_counter of a memcg is used to count how much a cgroup physical 
memory used.
If a cgroup only contains a process, they looks almost the same. But with
THP enabled, sometimes memory.usage_in_bytes in memcg may be twice or 
more than rss
in proc/[pid]/smaps_rollup as follow:

[root@...alhost sda]# cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/test/memory.usage_in_bytes
1080930304
[root@...alhost sda]# cat /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/test/cgroup.procs
1290
[root@...alhost sda]# cat /proc/1290/smaps_rollup
55ba80600000-ffffffffff601000 ---p 00000000 00:00 0                      
[rollup]
Rss:              500648 kB
Pss:              498337 kB
Shared_Clean:       2732 kB
Shared_Dirty:          0 kB
Private_Clean:       364 kB
Private_Dirty:    497552 kB
Referenced:       500648 kB
Anonymous:        492016 kB
LazyFree:              0 kB
AnonHugePages:    129024 kB
ShmemPmdMapped:        0 kB
Shared_Hugetlb:        0 kB
Private_Hugetlb:       0 kB
Swap:                  0 kB
SwapPss:               0 kB
Locked:                0 kB
THPeligible:    0

I have found the differences was because that __split_huge_pmd decrease
the mm_counter but page_counter in memcg was not decreased with refcount
of a head page is not zero. Here are the follows:

do_madvise
   madvise_dontneed_free
     zap_page_range
       unmap_single_vma
         zap_pud_range
           zap_pmd_range
             __split_huge_pmd
               __split_huge_pmd_locked
                 __mod_lruvec_page_state
             zap_pte_range
                add_mm_rss_vec
                   add_mm_counter                    -> decrease the 
mm_counter
       tlb_finish_mmu
         arch_tlb_finish_mmu
           tlb_flush_mmu_free
             free_pages_and_swap_cache
               release_pages
                 folio_put_testzero(page)            -> not zero, skip
                   continue;
                 __folio_put_large
                   free_transhuge_page
                     free_compound_page
                       mem_cgroup_uncharge
                         page_counter_uncharge        -> decrease the 
page_counter

node_page_stat which shows in meminfo was also decreased. the 
__split_huge_pmd
seems free no physical memory unless the total THP was free.I am 
confused which
one is the true physical memory used of a process.


Kind regards,

Yongqiang Liu