[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/4 v2] Define killable version for access_remote_vm() and use it in fs/proc

On 2/26/18 5:47 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Yang Shi wrote:
>>> Rather than killable, we have patches that introduce down_read_unfair()
>>> variants for the files you've modified (cmdline and environ) as well as
>>> others (maps, numa_maps, smaps).
>> You mean you have such functionality used by google internally?
> Yup, see
>>> When another thread is holding down_read() and there are queued
>>> down_write()'s, down_read_unfair() allows for grabbing the rwsem without
>>> queueing for it. Additionally, when another thread is holding
>>> down_write(), down_read_unfair() allows for queueing in front of other
>>> threads trying to grab it for write as well.
>> It sounds the __unfair variant make the caller have chance to jump the gun to
>> grab the semaphore before other waiters, right? But when a process holds the
>> semaphore, i.e. mmap_sem, for a long time, it still has to sleep in
>> uninterruptible state, right?
> Right, it's solving two separate things which I think may be able to be
> merged together. Killable is solving an issue where the rwsem is blocking
> for a long period of time in uninterruptible sleep, and unfair is solving
> an issue where reading the procfs files gets stalled for a long period of
> time. We haven't run into an issue (yet) where killable would have solved
> it; we just have the unfair variants to grab the rwsem asap and then, if
> killable, gracefully return.
>>> Ingo would know more about whether a variant like that in upstream Linux
>>> would be acceptable.
>>> Would you be interested in unfair variants instead of only addressing
>>> killable?
>> Yes, I'm although it still looks overkilling to me for reading /proc.
> We make certain inferences on the readablility of procfs files for other
> threads to determine how much its mm's mmap_sem is contended.

I see your points here for reading /proc for system monitor. However,
I'm concerned that the _unfair APIs get the processes which read /proc
priority elevation (not real priority change, just look like). It might
be abused by some applications, for example:

A high priority process and a low priority process are waiting for the
same rwsem, if the low priority process is trying to read /proc
maliciously on purpose, it can get elevated to grap the rwsem before any
other processes which are waiting for the same rwsem.


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-01 01:18    [W:0.082 / U:0.432 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site