linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm/show_mem: Add trylock while printing alloc info

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: <aLAVAZMKwYueL+5I@devbig569.cln6.facebook.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 01:36:17 -0700
From: Yueyang Pan <pyyjason@...il.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
	Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
	Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	kernel-team@...a.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm/show_mem: Add trylock while printing alloc info

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 03:28:41PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 03:06:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 11:34:23 -0700 Yueyang Pan <pyyjason@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > In production, show_mem() can be called concurrently from two
> > > different entities, for example one from oom_kill_process()
> > > another from __alloc_pages_slowpath from another kthread. This
> > > patch adds a mutex and invokes trylock before printing out the
> > > kernel alloc info in show_mem(). This way two alloc info won't
> > > interleave with each other, which then makes parsing easier.
> > > 
> > 
> > Fair enough, I guess.
> > 
> > > --- a/mm/show_mem.c
> > > +++ b/mm/show_mem.c
> > > @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(_totalram_pages);
> > >  unsigned long totalreserve_pages __read_mostly;
> > >  unsigned long totalcma_pages __read_mostly;
> > >  
> > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(mem_alloc_profiling_mutex);
> > 
> > It would be a bit neater to make this local to __show_mem() - it didn't
> > need file scope.
> 
> +1, something static to __show_mem().

Thanks for your feedback, Shakeel. See my reply to Andrew for this.

> 
> > 
> > Also, mutex_unlock() isn't to be used from interrupt context, so
> > problem.
> > 
> > Something like atomic cmpxchg or test_and_set_bit could be used and
> > wouldn't involve mutex_unlock()'s wakeup logic, which isn't needed
> > here.
> 
> +1

Again, see my reply to Andrew.

> 
> > 
> > >  static inline void show_node(struct zone *zone)
> > >  {
> > >  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA))
> > > @@ -419,7 +421,7 @@ void __show_mem(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask, int max_zone_idx)
> > >  	printk("%lu pages hwpoisoned\n", atomic_long_read(&num_poisoned_pages));
> > >  #endif
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING
> > > -	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()) {
> > > +	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled() && mutex_trylock(&mem_alloc_profiling_mutex)) {
> > >  		struct codetag_bytes tags[10];
> > >  		size_t i, nr;
> > >  
> > > @@ -445,6 +447,7 @@ void __show_mem(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask, int max_zone_idx)
> > >  						  ct->lineno, ct->function);
> > >  			}
> > >  		}
> > > +		mutex_unlock(&mem_alloc_profiling_mutex);
> > >  	}
> > 
> > If we're going to suppress the usual output then how about we let
> > people know this happened, rather than silently dropping it?
> > 
> > pr_notice("memory allocation output suppressed due to show_mem() contention\n")
> > 
> > or something like that?
> 
> Personally I think this is not needed as this patch is suppressing only
> the memory allocation profiling output which is global, will be same
> for all the consumers and context does not matter. All consumers will
> get the memory allocation profiling data eventually.

For this point, I sort of agree with you. Wait for others' opinions?

Thanks
Pan