From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S948018AbcJaXiY (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:38:24 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:33251 "EHLO mail-pf0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S947998AbcJaXiW (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:38:22 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:38:20 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Thomas Garnier cc: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gthelen@google.com, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, mhocko@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: Prevent memcg caches to be both OFF_SLAB & OBJFREELIST_SLAB In-Reply-To: <1477939010-111710-1-git-send-email-thgarnie@google.com> Message-ID: References: <1477939010-111710-1-git-send-email-thgarnie@google.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 31 Oct 2016, Thomas Garnier wrote: > While testing OBJFREELIST_SLAB integration with pagealloc, we found a > bug where kmem_cache(sys) would be created with both CFLGS_OFF_SLAB & > CFLGS_OBJFREELIST_SLAB. > > The original kmem_cache is created early making OFF_SLAB not possible. > When kmem_cache(sys) is created, OFF_SLAB is possible and if pagealloc > is enabled it will try to enable it first under certain conditions. > Given kmem_cache(sys) reuses the original flag, you can have both flags > at the same time resulting in allocation failures and odd behaviors. > > This fix discards allocator specific flags from memcg and ensure > cache_create cannot be called with them. > > Fixes: b03a017bebc4 ("mm/slab: introduce new slab management type, OBJFREELIST_SLAB") > Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier > Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen Order of the signoffs is strange, should this have a From: Greg Thelen in the first line or is this your patch? > --- > Based on next-20161025 > --- > mm/slab.h | 3 +++ > mm/slab_common.c | 10 ++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h > index 9653f2e..58be647 100644 > --- a/mm/slab.h > +++ b/mm/slab.h > @@ -144,6 +144,9 @@ static inline unsigned long kmem_cache_flags(unsigned long object_size, > > #define CACHE_CREATE_MASK (SLAB_CORE_FLAGS | SLAB_DEBUG_FLAGS | SLAB_CACHE_FLAGS) > > +/* Common allocator flags allowed for cache_create. */ > +#define SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED (CACHE_CREATE_MASK | SLAB_KASAN) > + > int __kmem_cache_shutdown(struct kmem_cache *); > void __kmem_cache_release(struct kmem_cache *); > int __kmem_cache_shrink(struct kmem_cache *, bool); > diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c > index 71f0b28..01d067c 100644 > --- a/mm/slab_common.c > +++ b/mm/slab_common.c > @@ -329,6 +329,12 @@ static struct kmem_cache *create_cache(const char *name, > struct kmem_cache *s; > int err; > > + /* Do not allow allocator specific flags */ > + if (flags & ~SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED) { > + err = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + Why not just flags &= SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED if we're concerned about this like kmem_cache_create does &= CACHE_CREATE_MASK? > err = -ENOMEM; > s = kmem_cache_zalloc(kmem_cache, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!s) > @@ -533,8 +539,8 @@ void memcg_create_kmem_cache(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > s = create_cache(cache_name, root_cache->object_size, > root_cache->size, root_cache->align, > - root_cache->flags, root_cache->ctor, > - memcg, root_cache); > + root_cache->flags & SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED, > + root_cache->ctor, memcg, root_cache); > /* > * If we could not create a memcg cache, do not complain, because > * that's not critical at all as we can always proceed with the root This introduces an inconsistency that isn't explained: why is SLAB_KASAN, the only reason why SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED needs to be defined, permitted for memcg_create_kmem_cache() but not kmem_cache_create()? (If we need to keep SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED around, I think it needs a new name since its a restriction on the cache, not slab.) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f69.google.com (mail-pa0-f69.google.com [209.85.220.69]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060BE6B029E for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:38:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f69.google.com with SMTP id hr10so40703446pac.2 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22a.google.com (mail-pf0-x22a.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22a]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i127si15834389pgc.228.2016.10.31.16.38.22 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id d2so9347804pfd.0 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:38:20 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: Prevent memcg caches to be both OFF_SLAB & OBJFREELIST_SLAB In-Reply-To: <1477939010-111710-1-git-send-email-thgarnie@google.com> Message-ID: References: <1477939010-111710-1-git-send-email-thgarnie@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Thomas Garnier Cc: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gthelen@google.com, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, mhocko@kernel.org On Mon, 31 Oct 2016, Thomas Garnier wrote: > While testing OBJFREELIST_SLAB integration with pagealloc, we found a > bug where kmem_cache(sys) would be created with both CFLGS_OFF_SLAB & > CFLGS_OBJFREELIST_SLAB. > > The original kmem_cache is created early making OFF_SLAB not possible. > When kmem_cache(sys) is created, OFF_SLAB is possible and if pagealloc > is enabled it will try to enable it first under certain conditions. > Given kmem_cache(sys) reuses the original flag, you can have both flags > at the same time resulting in allocation failures and odd behaviors. > > This fix discards allocator specific flags from memcg and ensure > cache_create cannot be called with them. > > Fixes: b03a017bebc4 ("mm/slab: introduce new slab management type, OBJFREELIST_SLAB") > Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier > Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen Order of the signoffs is strange, should this have a From: Greg Thelen in the first line or is this your patch? > --- > Based on next-20161025 > --- > mm/slab.h | 3 +++ > mm/slab_common.c | 10 ++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h > index 9653f2e..58be647 100644 > --- a/mm/slab.h > +++ b/mm/slab.h > @@ -144,6 +144,9 @@ static inline unsigned long kmem_cache_flags(unsigned long object_size, > > #define CACHE_CREATE_MASK (SLAB_CORE_FLAGS | SLAB_DEBUG_FLAGS | SLAB_CACHE_FLAGS) > > +/* Common allocator flags allowed for cache_create. */ > +#define SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED (CACHE_CREATE_MASK | SLAB_KASAN) > + > int __kmem_cache_shutdown(struct kmem_cache *); > void __kmem_cache_release(struct kmem_cache *); > int __kmem_cache_shrink(struct kmem_cache *, bool); > diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c > index 71f0b28..01d067c 100644 > --- a/mm/slab_common.c > +++ b/mm/slab_common.c > @@ -329,6 +329,12 @@ static struct kmem_cache *create_cache(const char *name, > struct kmem_cache *s; > int err; > > + /* Do not allow allocator specific flags */ > + if (flags & ~SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED) { > + err = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + Why not just flags &= SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED if we're concerned about this like kmem_cache_create does &= CACHE_CREATE_MASK? > err = -ENOMEM; > s = kmem_cache_zalloc(kmem_cache, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!s) > @@ -533,8 +539,8 @@ void memcg_create_kmem_cache(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > s = create_cache(cache_name, root_cache->object_size, > root_cache->size, root_cache->align, > - root_cache->flags, root_cache->ctor, > - memcg, root_cache); > + root_cache->flags & SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED, > + root_cache->ctor, memcg, root_cache); > /* > * If we could not create a memcg cache, do not complain, because > * that's not critical at all as we can always proceed with the root This introduces an inconsistency that isn't explained: why is SLAB_KASAN, the only reason why SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED needs to be defined, permitted for memcg_create_kmem_cache() but not kmem_cache_create()? (If we need to keep SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED around, I think it needs a new name since its a restriction on the cache, not slab.) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org