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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <8c6a71aaaabc0a8ea4c36ce609cb097857b68a96.camel@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:02:12 +0200 From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/3] sock: Fix improper heuristic on raising memory On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 21:28 +0800, Abel Wu wrote: > Before sockets became aware of net-memcg's memory pressure since > commit e1aab161e013 ("socket: initial cgroup code."), the memory > usage would be granted to raise if below average even when under > protocol's pressure. This provides fairness among the sockets of > same protocol. > > That commit changes this because the heuristic will also be > effective when only memcg is under pressure which makes no sense. > Fix this by reverting to the behavior before that commit. > > After this fix, __sk_mem_raise_allocated() no longer considers > memcg's pressure. As memcgs are isolated from each other w.r.t. > memory accounting, consuming one's budget won't affect others. > So except the places where buffer sizes are needed to be tuned, > allow workloads to use the memory they are provisioned. > > Fixes: e1aab161e013 ("socket: initial cgroup code.") > Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com> > --- > v2: > - Ignore memcg pressure when raising memory allocated. > --- > net/core/sock.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c > index 9f969e3c2ddf..1d28e3e87970 100644 > --- a/net/core/sock.c > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > @@ -3035,7 +3035,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sk_wait_data); > * @amt: pages to allocate > * @kind: allocation type > * > - * Similar to __sk_mem_schedule(), but does not update sk_forward_alloc > + * Similar to __sk_mem_schedule(), but does not update sk_forward_alloc. > + * > + * Unlike the globally shared limits among the sockets under same protocol, > + * consuming the budget of a memcg won't have direct effect on other ones. > + * So be optimistic about memcg's tolerance, and leave the callers to decide > + * whether or not to raise allocated through sk_under_memory_pressure() or > + * its variants. > */ > int __sk_mem_raise_allocated(struct sock *sk, int size, int amt, int kind) > { > @@ -3093,7 +3099,11 @@ int __sk_mem_raise_allocated(struct sock *sk, int size, int amt, int kind) > if (sk_has_memory_pressure(sk)) { > u64 alloc; > > - if (!sk_under_memory_pressure(sk)) > + /* The following 'average' heuristic is within the > + * scope of global accounting, so it only makes > + * sense for global memory pressure. > + */ > + if (!sk_under_global_memory_pressure(sk)) > return 1; Since the whole logic is fairly non trivial I'd like to explicitly note (for my own future memory) that I think this is the correct approach. The memcg granted the current allocation via the mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() call above, the heuristic to eventually suppress the allocation should be outside the memcg scope. LGTM, thanks! Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists