netdev - Re: [PATCH next-20130703] net: sock: Add ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM for mem_cgroup_sockets

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: <20130703163429.GD5153@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 3 Jul 2013 18:34:29 +0200
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
Cc:	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next-20130703] net: sock: Add ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM for
 mem_cgroup_sockets_{init,destroy}

On Wed 03-07-13 18:11:28, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> > On Wed 03-07-13 17:53:21, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz> wrote:
> >> > On Wed 03-07-13 20:51:00, Li Zefan wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> >> [PATCH] memcg: fix build error if CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM=n
> >> >>
> >> >> Fix this build error:
> >> >>
> >> >> mm/built-in.o: In function `mem_cgroup_css_free':
> >> >> memcontrol.c:(.text+0x5caa6): undefined reference to
> >> >> 'mem_cgroup_sockets_destroy'
> >> >>
> >> >> Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> >> >> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
> >> >
> >> > I am seeing the same thing I just didn't get to reporting it.
> >> > The other approach is not bad as well but I find this tiny better
> >> > because mem_cgroup_css_free should care only about a single cleanup
> >> > function for whole kmem. If that one needs to do tcp kmem specific
> >> > cleanup then it should be done inside kmem_cgroup_css_offline.
> >> >
> >>
> >> As said in my other mail, for me this makes sense as it is a followup.
> >>
> >> But, still I don't know why sock.c has is own mem_cgroup_sockets_{init,destroy}.
> >
> > That is the only definition AFAICS (except for !CONFIG_NET where it
> > expands to NOOP). Please note that memcg_init_kmem is a common kmem
> > initializator and it needs to be prepared for !CONFIG_NET.
> >
> > The same applies to _destroy.
> > Makes more sense now?
> >
> 
> So, that stuff comes originally from the net-tree.

No, it all came from tcp kmem accounting. It is a memcg thingy and I
guess it was placed into sock.c because it depends on some static
symbols there (e.g. proto_list_mutex).

> I understand the !CONFIG_NET case, but lack the understanding why
> memcontrol.c needs _destroy.

Because it is memcg specific and it has to be called when a group is
destroyed.

> Can you explain that (sorry /me is no mm-geek)?
> 
> - Sedat -
> 
> [1] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/net/core/sock.c?id=next-20130703#n147
> [2] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/include/net/sock.h?id=next-20130703#n73
> 
> > [...]
> > --
> > Michal Hocko
> > SUSE Labs

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html