[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: interaction of MADV_PAGEOUT with CoW anonymous mappings?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 04:58:55PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 17-03-20 08:00:55, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 08:12:39AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Just to make it clear, are you really suggesting to special case
> > > page_check_references for madvise path?
> > >
> >
> > No, (page_mapcount() > 1) checks *effectively* fixes the performance
> > bug as well as vulnerability issue.
> Ahh, ok then we are on the same page. You were replying to the part
> where I have pointed out that you can control aging by these calls
> and your response suggested that this is somehow undesirable behavior or
> even a bug.

Sorry about the confusing.

I want to clarify my speaking.

If we don't have vulnerability issue Jann raised, the performance issue
Daniel pointed should be fixed by introducing a special flag in
page_check_references from madvise path to avoid cleaning of access bit
from other processes's pte. With it, we don't need to limit semantic of
MADV_PAGEOUT as "exclusive page only" so that MADV_PAGEOUT will work
*cold* shared pages as well as exclusive one.

However, since we have the vulnerability issue, *unfortunately*, we need
to make MADV_PAGEOUT's semantic working with only exclusive page.
Thus, page_mapcount check in madvise patch will fix both issues


 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-17 18:21    [W:0.090 / U:1.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site