From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751710AbeEDQWP (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 4 May 2018 12:22:15 -0400
Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:37546 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751425AbeEDQWO (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 4 May 2018 12:22:14 -0400
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 18:22:09 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, mingo@kernel.org,
        paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@chromium.org, riel@redhat.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
        marcos.souza.org@gmail.com, hoeun.ryu@gmail.com,
        pasha.tatashin@oracle.com, gs051095@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
        rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg
Message-ID: <20180504162209.GB26573@redhat.com>
References: <87h8nr2sa3.fsf_-_@xmission.com>
 <20180502084708.GC26305@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20180502132026.GB16060@cmpxchg.org>
 <87lgd1zww0.fsf_-_@xmission.com>
 <20180503133338.GA23401@redhat.com>
 <87y3h0x0qg.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180504142056.GA26151@redhat.com>
 <87r2mrh4is.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180504145435.GA26573@redhat.com>
 <87y3gzfmjt.fsf@xmission.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87y3gzfmjt.fsf@xmission.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 05/04, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > I'd vote for the change in exec_mmap(). This way mm_init_memcg() can just
> > nullify mm->memcg.
>
> There is at least one common path where we need the memory control group
> properly initialized so memory allocations don't escape the memory
> control group.
>
> do_execveat_common
>    copy_strings
>       get_arg_page
>          get_user_pages_remote
>             __get_user_pages_locked
>                __get_user_pages
>                   faultin_page
>                      handle_mm_fault
>                         count_memcg_event_mm
>                         __handle_mm_fault
>                           handle_pte_fault
>                              do_anonymous_page
>                                 mem_cgroup_try_charge
>
> I am surprised I can't easily find more.   Apparently in load_elf_binary
> we call elf_mmap after set_new_exec and install_exec_creds, making
> a gracefull recovery from elf_mmap failures impossible.
>
> In any case we most definitely need the memory control group properly
> setup before exec_mmap.

Confused ...

new_mm->memcg has no effect until exec_mmap(), why it can't be NULL ?

and why do you think mem_cgroup_try_charge() can use the wrong memcg
in this case?

Oleg.