Linux-Security-Module Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] apparmor: Use a memory pool instead per-CPU caches
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:47:25 +0200
Message-ID: <20190430144725.gd6r3aketxuqdyir@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae17e2a3-7d08-5863-4fba-66ddeac11541@canonical.com>

On 2019-04-28 16:56:59 [-0700], John Johansen wrote:
> So digging into why the history of the per cpu buffers in apparmor.
> We used to do buffer allocations via kmalloc and there were a few reasons
> for the switch 
> 
> * speed/lockless: speaks for it self, mediation is already slow enough

it is shared among all CPUs but it is a small/quick operation to
add/return a buffer.

> * some buffer allocations had to be done with GFP_ATOMIC, making them
>   more likely to fail. Since we fail closed that means failure would
>   block access. This actually became a serious problem in a couple
>   places. Switching to per cpu buffers and blocking pre-empt was
>   the solution.

GFP_KERNEL is allowed to use IO/SWAP and ATOMIC has emergency pools. The
new approach won't return a NULL pointer, simply spin to either allocate
new memory or get one which was just returned.

> * in heavy use cases we would see a lot of buffers being allocated
>   and freed. Which resulted in locking slow downs and also buffer
>   allocation failures. So having the buffers preallocated allowed us
>   to bound this potential problem.
> 
> This was all 6 years ago. Going to a mem pool certainly could help,
> reduce the memory foot print, and would definitely help with
> preempt/real time kernels.
> 
> A big concern with this patchset is reverting back to GFP_KERNEL
> for everything. We definitely were getting failures due to allocations
> in atomic context. There have been lots of changes in the kernel over
> the last six years so it possible these cases don't exist anymore. I
> went through and built some kernels with this patchset and have run
> through some testing without tripping that problem but I don't think
> it has seen enough testing yet.

Do you want apply #1 now and #2 later? I audited the ATOMIC->KERNEL
changes manually and I didn't see any atomic context. It looked like the
only reason for ATOMIC was the preempt_disable() due to the memory pool.

Sebastian

  reply index

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-05 13:34 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-04-05 13:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] apparmor: Switch to GFP_KERNEL where possible Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-07 19:57   ` John Johansen
2019-04-15 10:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] apparmor: Use a memory pool instead per-CPU caches Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-04-28 23:56 ` John Johansen
2019-04-30 14:47   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2019-05-01 21:29     ` John Johansen
2019-05-02 10:51       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-02 13:17         ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-05-02 13:47           ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-02 14:10             ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-05-03 11:48               ` [PATCH v2] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-03 11:51                 ` [PATCH v3] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-03 12:41                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2019-05-03 14:12                     ` [PATCH v4] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-07 19:57                       ` John Johansen
2019-10-02  8:59                         ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-10-02 15:47                           ` John Johansen
2019-10-02 15:52                             ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2019-05-02 19:33         ` [PATCH 1/2] " John Johansen

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=20190430144725.gd6r3aketxuqdyir@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

Linux-Security-Module Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/0 linux-security-module/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 linux-security-module linux-security-module/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module \
		linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-security-module

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module


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