netdev - Re: [PATCH RESEND 7/8] pipe: account to kmemcg

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: <20160525103011.GF11150@esperanza>
Date:	Wed, 25 May 2016 13:30:11 +0300
From:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<x86@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 7/8] pipe: account to kmemcg

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 01:04:33PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-05-24 at 19:13 +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 05:59:02AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > ...
> > > > +static int anon_pipe_buf_steal(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe,
> > > > +			       struct pipe_buffer *buf)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct page *page = buf->page;
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (page_count(page) == 1) {
> > > 
> > > This looks racy : some cpu could have temporarily elevated page count.
> > 
> > All pipe operations (pipe_buf_operations->get, ->release, ->steal) are
> > supposed to be called under pipe_lock. So, if we see a pipe_buffer->page
> > with refcount of 1 in ->steal, that means that we are the only its user
> > and it can't be spliced to another pipe.
> > 
> > In fact, I just copied the code from generic_pipe_buf_steal, adding
> > kmemcg related checks along the way, so it should be fine.
> 
> So you guarantee that no other cpu might have done
> get_page_unless_zero() right before this test ?

Each pipe_buffer holds a reference to its page. If we find page's
refcount to be 1 here, then it can be referenced only by our
pipe_buffer. And the refcount cannot be increased by a parallel thread,
because we hold pipe_lock, which rules out splice, and otherwise it's
impossible to reach the page as it is not on lru. That said, I think I
guarantee that this should be safe.

Thanks,
Vladimir