All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	<vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<shakeelb@google.com>, <willy@infradead.org>, <alexs@kernel.org>,
	<richard.weiyang@gmail.com>, <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, memcg: avoid possible NULL pointer dereferencing in mem_cgroup_init()
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 19:18:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <59122ae4-52c9-4ff9-104d-872d770dec0c@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YQfMISKHetFOm1Kx@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 2021/8/2 18:42, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-08-21 18:00:10, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2021/8/2 14:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Sat 31-07-21 10:05:51, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>>> On 2021/7/30 14:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>> On Thu 29-07-21 20:12:43, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 08:57:54PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>>>>>> rtpn might be NULL in very rare case. We have better to check it before
>>>>>>> dereferencing it. Since memcg can live with NULL rb_tree_per_node in
>>>>>>> soft_limit_tree, warn this case and continue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  mm/memcontrol.c | 2 ++
>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
>>>>>>> index 5b4592d1e0f2..70a32174e7c4 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
>>>>>>> @@ -7109,6 +7109,8 @@ static int __init mem_cgroup_init(void)
>>>>>>>  		rtpn = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*rtpn), GFP_KERNEL,
>>>>>>>  				    node_online(node) ? node : NUMA_NO_NODE);
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> +		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!rtpn))
>>>>>>> +			continue;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also really doubt that it makes any sense to continue in this case.
>>>>>> If this allocations fails (at the very beginning of the system's life, it's an __init function),
>>>>>> something is terribly wrong and panic'ing on a NULL-pointer dereference sounds like
>>>>>> a perfect choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Moreover this is 24B allocation during early boot. Kernel will OOM and
>>>>> panic when not being able to find any victim. I do not think we need to
>>>>
>>>> Agree with you. But IMO it may not be a good idea to leave the rtpn without NULL check. We should defend
>>>> it though it could hardly happen. But I'm not insist on this check. I will drop this patch if you insist.
>>>
>>> It is not that I would insist. I just do not see any point in the code
>>> churn. This check is not going to ever trigger and there is nothing you
>>> can do to recover anyway so crashing the kernel is likely the only
>>> choice left.
>>>
>>
>> I hope I get the point now. What you mean is nothing we can do to recover and panic'ing on a
>> NULL-pointer dereference is a perfect choice ? Should we declare that we leave the rtpn without
>> NULL check on purpose like below ?
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> @@ -7109,8 +7109,12 @@ static int __init mem_cgroup_init(void)
>>                 rtpn = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*rtpn), GFP_KERNEL,
>>                                     node_online(node) ? node : NUMA_NO_NODE);
>>
>> -               if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!rtpn))
>> -                       continue;
>> +               /*
>> +                * If this allocation fails (at the very beginning of the
>> +                * system's life, it's an __init function), something is
>> +                * terribly wrong and panic'ing on a NULL-pointer
>> +                * dereference sounds like a perfect choice.
>> +                */
> 
> I am not really sure this is really worth it. Really we do not really
> want to have similar comments all over the early init code, do we?

Maybe not. Will drop this patch.

Thanks.

> 
>>                 rtpn->rb_root = RB_ROOT;
>>                 rtpn->rb_rightmost = NULL;
>>                 spin_lock_init(&rtpn->lock);
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-02 11:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-29 12:57 [PATCH 0/5] Cleanups and fixup for memcontrol Miaohe Lin
2021-07-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm, memcg: remove unused functions Miaohe Lin
2021-07-29 14:07   ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-29 14:07     ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-30  2:39   ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:39     ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:57   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-07-30  6:45   ` Michal Hocko
2021-07-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm, memcg: narrow the scope of percpu_charge_mutex Miaohe Lin
2021-07-30  2:42   ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:42     ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  3:06   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-07-30  6:50     ` Michal Hocko
2021-07-31  2:29       ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-02  6:49         ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-02  9:54           ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-03  3:40         ` Roman Gushchin
2021-08-03  6:29           ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-03  7:11             ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-03  7:13               ` Roman Gushchin
2021-08-03  7:27                 ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-03  9:33             ` Muchun Song
2021-08-03  9:33               ` Muchun Song
2021-08-03 10:50               ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-03 14:15       ` Johannes Weiner
2021-08-04  8:20         ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-05  1:44           ` Miaohe Lin
2021-07-30  6:46   ` Michal Hocko
2021-07-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm, memcg: save some atomic ops when flush is already true Miaohe Lin
2021-07-29 14:40   ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-29 14:40     ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-30  2:37   ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:37     ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  3:07   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-07-30  6:51   ` Michal Hocko
2021-07-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm, memcg: avoid possible NULL pointer dereferencing in mem_cgroup_init() Miaohe Lin
2021-07-29 13:52   ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-07-30  1:50     ` Miaohe Lin
2021-07-30  3:12   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-07-30  6:29     ` Miaohe Lin
2021-07-30  6:44     ` Michal Hocko
2021-07-31  2:05       ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-02  6:43         ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-02 10:00           ` Miaohe Lin
2021-08-02 10:42             ` Michal Hocko
2021-08-02 11:18               ` Miaohe Lin [this message]
2021-07-29 12:57 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm, memcg: always call __mod_node_page_state() with preempt disabled Miaohe Lin
2021-07-29 14:39   ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-29 14:39     ` Shakeel Butt
2021-07-30  1:52     ` Miaohe Lin
2021-07-30  2:33       ` [External] " Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:33         ` Muchun Song
2021-07-30  2:46         ` Miaohe Lin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=59122ae4-52c9-4ff9-104d-872d770dec0c@huawei.com \
    --to=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexs@kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, memcg: avoid possible NULL pointer dereferencing in mem_cgroup_init()' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.