linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 31/35] lib: add memory allocations report in show

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: <ZdTgWb7eNtF4hLw2@tiehlicka>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:24:41 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	hannes@...xchg.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de,
	dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com,
	corbet@....net, void@...ifault.com, peterz@...radead.org,
	juri.lelli@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
	arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
	david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org,
	masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org,
	tj@...nel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev, rppt@...nel.org,
	paulmck@...nel.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
	yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
	hughd@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org,
	ndesaulniers@...gle.com, vvvvvv@...gle.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
	bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
	cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
	42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com,
	dvyukov@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com, songmuchun@...edance.com,
	jbaron@...mai.com, rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com,
	kaleshsingh@...gle.com, kernel-team@...roid.com,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	iommu@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 31/35] lib: add memory allocations report in show_mem()

On Tue 20-02-24 12:18:49, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 05:23:29PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 19-02-24 09:17:36, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > [...]
> > > For now I think with Vlastimil's __GFP_NOWARN suggestion the code
> > > becomes safe and the only risk is to lose this report. If we get cases
> > > with reports missing this data, we can easily change to reserved
> > > memory.
> > 
> > This is not just about missing part of the oom report. This is annoying
> > but not earth shattering. Eating into very small reserves (that might be
> > the only usable memory while the system is struggling in OOM situation)
> > could cause functional problems that would be non trivial to test for.
> > All that for debugging purposes is just lame. If you want to reuse the code
> > for a different purpose then abstract it and allocate the buffer when you
> > can afford that and use preallocated on when in OOM situation.
> > 
> > We have always went extra mile to avoid potentially disruptive
> > operations from the oom handling code and I do not see any good reason
> > to diverge from that principle.
> 
> Michal, I gave you the logic between dedicated reserves and system
> reserves. Please stop repeating these vague what-ifs.

Your argument makes little sense and it seems that it is impossible to
explain that to you. I gave up on discussing this further with you.

Consider NAK to any additional allocation from oom path unless you can
give very _solid_ arguments this is absolutely necessary. "It's gona be
fine and work most of the time" is not a solid argument.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs