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: <ZfsZElNXNf6bOKSt@tiehlicka>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:12:50 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: stop resize loop if limit was changed
 again

On Wed 20-03-24 13:09:07, Waiman Long wrote:
> 
> On 3/20/24 06:03, Pavel Tikhomirov wrote:
> > In memory_max_write() we first set memcg->memory.max and only then
> > try to enforce it in loop. What if while we are in loop someone else
> > have changed memcg->memory.max but we are still trying to enforce
> > the old value? I believe this can lead to nasty consequence like getting
> > an oom on perfectly fine cgroup within it's limits or excess reclaim.
> 
> Concurrent write to the same cgroup control file is not possible as the
> underlying kernfs_open_file structure has a mutex that serialize access to
> the file.

This is good to know and I was not aware of that. Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ