From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs instances Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 13:16:38 -0600 Message-ID: <87v9obipk9.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> References: <20200210150519.538333-1-gladkov.alexey@gmail.com> <20200210150519.538333-8-gladkov.alexey@gmail.com> <87v9odlxbr.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20200212144921.sykucj4mekcziicz@comp-core-i7-2640m-0182e6> <87tv3vkg1a.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:45:06 -0800") Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: LKML , Kernel Hardening , Linux API , Linux FS Devel , Linux Security Module , Akinobu Mita , Alexander Viro , Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Daniel Micay , Djalal Harouni , "Dmitry V . Levin" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , "J . Bruce Fields" , Jeff Layton , Jonathan Corbet Ke List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 7:01 AM Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Fundamentally proc_flush_task is an optimization. Just getting rid of >> dentries earlier. At least at one point it was an important >> optimization because the old process dentries would just sit around >> doing nothing for anyone. > > I'm pretty sure it's still important. It's very easy to generate a > _ton_ of dentries with /proc. > >> I wonder if instead of invalidating specific dentries we could instead >> fire wake up a shrinker and point it at one or more instances of proc. > > It shouldn't be the dentries themselves that are a freeing problem. > They're being RCU-free'd anyway because of lookup. It's the > proc_mounts list that is the problem, isn't it? > > So it's just fs_info that needs to be rcu-delayed because it contains > that list. Or is there something else? The fundamental dcache thing we are playing with is: dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(proc_root, &name); if (dentry) { d_invalidate(dentry); dput(dentry); } As Al pointed out upthread dput and d_invalidate can both sleep. The dput can potentially go away if we use __d_lookup_rcu instead of d_lookup. The challenge is d_invalidate. It has the fundamentally sleeping detach_mounts loop. Even shrink_dcache_parent has a cond_sched() in there to ensure it doesn't live lock the system. We could and arguabley should set DCACHE_CANT_MOUNT on the proc pid dentries. Which will prevent having to deal with mounts. But I don't see an easy way of getting shrink_dcache_parent to run without sleeping. Ideas? Eric