Re: Protection against container fork bombs [WAS: Re: memcg with kmem limit doesn't recover after disk i/o causes limit to be hit]

[Richard Davies <richard@arachsys.com>]

Dwight Engen wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Tim Hockin wrote:
> > > Here's the reason it doesn't work for us: It doesn't work.
> >
> > There is a "simple" solution for that. Help us to fix it.
> >
> > > It was something like 2 YEARS since we first wanted this, and it
> > > STILL does not work.
> >
> > My recollection is that it was primarily Parallels and Google asking
> > for the kmem accounting. The reason why I didn't fight against
> > inclusion although the implementation at the time didn't have a
> > proper slab shrinking implemented was that that would happen later.
> > Well, that later hasn't happened yet and we are slowly getting there.
> >
> > > You're postponing a pretty simple request indefinitely in
> > > favor of a much more complex feature, which still doesn't really
> > > give me what I want.
> >
> > But we cannot simply add a new interface that will have to be
> > maintained for ever just because something else that is supposed to
> > workaround bugs.
> >
> > > What I want is an API that works like rlimit but per-cgroup, rather
> > > than per-UID.
> >
> > You can use an out-of-tree patchset for the time being or help to get
> > kmem into shape. If there are principal reasons why kmem cannot be
> > used then you better articulate them.
>
> Is there a plan to separately account/limit stack pages vs kmem in
> general? Richard would have to verify, but I suspect kmem is not currently
> viable as a process limiter for him because icache/dcache/stack is all
> accounted together.

Certainly I would like to be able to limit container fork-bombs without
limiting the amount of disk IO caching for processes in those containers.

In my testing with of kmem limits, I needed a limit of 256MB or lower to
catch fork bombs early enough. I would definitely like more than 256MB of
disk caching.

So if we go the "working kmem" route, I would like to be able to specify a
limit excluding disk cache.


I am also somewhat worried that normal software use could legitimately go
above 256MB of kmem (even excluding disk cache) - I got to 50MB in testing
just by booting a distro with a few daemons in a container.

Richard.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>