Kernel-hardening archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	 LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
	 Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux Security Module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
	 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	 Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>,
	 Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@gmail.com>,
	 "Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
	 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	 Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	 "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	 Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
	 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	 Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs instances
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 22:37:52 -0600
Message-ID: <87pnejf6fz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgmn9Qds0VznyphouSZW6e42GWDT5H1dpZg8pyGDGN+=w@mail.gmail.com> (Linus Torvalds's message of "Wed, 12 Feb 2020 16:48:14 -0800")

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 1:48 PM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>>
>> The good news is proc_flush_task isn't exactly called from process exit.
>> proc_flush_task is called during zombie clean up. AKA release_task.
>
> Yeah, that at least avoids some of the nasty locking while dying debug problems.
>
> But the one I was more worried about was actually the lock contention
> issue with lots of processes. The lock is basically a single global
> lock in many situations - yes, it's technically per-ns, but in a lot
> of cases you really only have one namespace anyway.
>
> And we've had problems with global locks in this area before, notably
> the one you call out:
>
>> Further after proc_flush_task does it's thing the code goes
>> and does "write_lock_irq(&task_list_lock);"
>
> Yeah, so it's not introducing a new issue, but it is potentially
> making something we already know is bad even worse.
>
>> What would be downside of having a mutex for a list of proc superblocks?
>> A mutex that is taken for both reading and writing the list.
>
> That's what the original patch actually was, and I was hoping we could
> avoid that thing.
>
> An rwsem would be possibly better, since most cases by far are likely
> about reading.
>
> And yes, I'm very aware of the task_list_lock, but it's literally why
> I don't want to make a new one.
>
> I'm _hoping_ we can some day come up with something better than
> task_list_lock.

Yes.  I understand that.

I occassionally play with ideas, and converted all of proc to rcu
to help with situation but I haven't come up with anything clearly
better.


All of this is why I was really hoping we could have a change in
strategy and see if we can make the shrinker be able to better prune
proc inodes.



I think I have an alternate idea that could work.  Add some extra code
into proc_task_readdir, that would look for dentries that no longer
point to tasks and d_invalidate them.  With the same logic probably
being called from a few more places as well like proc_pid_readdir,
proc_task_lookup, and proc_pid_lookup.

We could even optimize it and have a process died flag we set in the
superblock.

That would would batch up the freeing work until the next time someone
reads from proc in a way that would create more dentries.  So it would
prevent dentries from reaped zombies from growing without bound.

Hmm.  Given the existence of proc_fill_cache it would really be a good
idea if readdir and lookup performed some of the freeing work as well.
As on readdir we always populate the dcache for all of the directory
entries.

I am booked solid for the next little while but if no one beats me to it
I will try and code something like that up where at least readdir
looks for and invalidates stale dentries.

Eric

  reply index

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-10 15:05 [PATCH v8 00/11] proc: modernize proc to support multiple private instances Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 01/11] proc: Rename struct proc_fs_info to proc_fs_opts Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 02/11] proc: add proc_fs_info struct to store proc information Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 03/11] proc: move /proc/{self|thread-self} dentries to proc_fs_info Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 18:23   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-12 15:00     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 04/11] proc: move hide_pid, pid_gid from pid_namespace " Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 05/11] proc: add helpers to set and get proc hidepid and gid mount options Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 18:30   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-12 14:57     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 06/11] proc: support mounting procfs instances inside same pid namespace Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs instances Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 17:46   ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-10 19:23     ` Al Viro
2020-02-11  1:36   ` ebiederm
2020-02-11  4:01     ` ebiederm
2020-02-12 14:49     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-12 14:59       ` ebiederm
2020-02-12 17:08         ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-12 18:45         ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-12 19:16           ` ebiederm
2020-02-12 19:49             ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-12 20:03               ` Al Viro
2020-02-12 20:35                 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-12 20:38                   ` Al Viro
2020-02-12 20:41                     ` Al Viro
2020-02-12 21:02                       ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-12 21:46                         ` ebiederm
2020-02-13  0:48                           ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-13  4:37                             ` ebiederm [this message]
2020-02-13  5:55                               ` Al Viro
2020-02-13 21:30                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-13 22:23                                   ` Al Viro
2020-02-13 22:47                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2020-02-14 14:15                                       ` ebiederm
2020-02-14  3:48                                 ` ebiederm
2020-02-14  3:49                     ` ebiederm
2020-02-12 19:47           ` Al Viro
2020-02-11 22:45   ` Al Viro
2020-02-12 14:26     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 08/11] proc: instantiate only pids that we can ptrace on 'hidepid=4' mount option Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 16:29   ` Jordan Glover
2020-02-12 14:34     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 09/11] proc: add option to mount only a pids subset Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 10/11] docs: proc: add documentation for "hidepid=4" and "subset=pidfs" options and new mount behavior Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 18:29   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-12 16:03     ` Alexey Gladkov
2020-02-10 15:05 ` [PATCH v8 11/11] proc: Move hidepid values to uapi as they are user interface to mount Alexey Gladkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=87pnejf6fz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=akinobu.mita@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=danielmicay@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=solar@openwall.com \
    --cc=tixxdz@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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

Kernel-hardening archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/0 kernel-hardening/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 kernel-hardening kernel-hardening/ https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening \
		kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
	public-inbox-index kernel-hardening

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/com.openwall.lists.kernel-hardening


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git