From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B99F3C433E0 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F642395A for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 17F642395A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=containers-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739078624A; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QtqC-Inf_O_r; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5BE2861F1; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7CA0C088B; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74260C088B for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A2D20788 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H2P+VpGU5lZD for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from raptor.unsafe.ru (raptor.unsafe.ru [5.9.43.93]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5762047C for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from example.org (ip-94-112-41-137.net.upcbroadband.cz [94.112.41.137]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by raptor.unsafe.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DBD220459; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:04:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:04:27 +0100 From: Alexey Gladkov To: "Eric W. Biederman" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/8] Use refcount_t for ucounts reference counting Message-ID: <20210121120427.iiggfmw3tpsmyzeb@example.org> References: <116c7669744404364651e3b380db2d82bb23f983.1610722473.git.gladkov.alexey@gmail.com> <20210118194551.h2hrwof7b3q5vgoi@example.org> <20210118205629.zro2qkd3ut42bpyq@example.org> <87eeig74kv.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87eeig74kv.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.1 (raptor.unsafe.ru [5.9.43.93]); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:05:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Jens Axboe , Kees Cook , Kernel Hardening , Linux Containers , Jann Horn , LKML , Oleg Nesterov , Linux-MM , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , io-uring X-BeenThere: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Containers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: containers-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "Containers" On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:57:36PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Alexey Gladkov writes: > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:34:29PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:46 AM Alexey Gladkov > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Sorry about that. I thought that this code is not needed when switching > >> > from int to refcount_t. I was wrong. > >> > >> Well, you _may_ be right. I personally didn't check how the return > >> value is used. > >> > >> I only reacted to "it certainly _may_ be used, and there is absolutely > >> no comment anywhere about why it wouldn't matter". > > > > I have not found examples where checked the overflow after calling > > refcount_inc/refcount_add. > > > > For example in kernel/fork.c:2298 : > > > > current->signal->nr_threads++; > > atomic_inc(¤t->signal->live); > > refcount_inc(¤t->signal->sigcnt); > > > > $ semind search signal_struct.sigcnt > > def include/linux/sched/signal.h:83 refcount_t sigcnt; > > m-- kernel/fork.c:723 put_signal_struct if (refcount_dec_and_test(&sig->sigcnt)) > > m-- kernel/fork.c:1571 copy_signal refcount_set(&sig->sigcnt, 1); > > m-- kernel/fork.c:2298 copy_process refcount_inc(¤t->signal->sigcnt); > > > > It seems to me that the only way is to use __refcount_inc and then compare > > the old value with REFCOUNT_MAX > > > > Since I have not seen examples of such checks, I thought that this is > > acceptable. Sorry once again. I have not tried to hide these changes. > > The current ucount code does check for overflow and fails the increment > in every case. > > So arguably it will be a regression and inferior error handling behavior > if the code switches to the ``better'' refcount_t data structure. > > I originally didn't use refcount_t because silently saturating and not > bothering to handle the error makes me uncomfortable. > > Not having to acquire the ucounts_lock every time seems nice. Perhaps > the path forward would be to start with stupid/correct code that always > takes the ucounts_lock for every increment of ucounts->count, that is > later replaced with something more optimal. > > Not impacting performance in the non-namespace cases and having good > performance in the other cases is a fundamental requirement of merging > code like this. Did I understand your suggestion correctly that you suggest to use spin_lock for atomic_read and atomic_inc ? If so, then we are already incrementing the counter under ucounts_lock. ... if (atomic_read(&ucounts->count) == INT_MAX) ucounts = NULL; else atomic_inc(&ucounts->count); spin_unlock_irq(&ucounts_lock); return ucounts; something like this ? -- Rgrds, legion _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers