linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Yue Zhao <findns94@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: change memcg->oom_group access with atomic operations
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 13:51:29 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y/TMYa8DrocppXRu@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod55K5zbbVYptq8ud=nKVyU1xceGVf6UcambBZ3BA2TZqA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 10:52:10PM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 9:17 PM Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
> > > On Feb 20, 2023, at 3:06 PM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 01:09:44PM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:16:38PM +0800, Yue Zhao wrote:
> > >>> The knob for cgroup v2 memory controller: memory.oom.group
> > >>> will be read and written simultaneously by user space
> > >>> programs, thus we'd better change memcg->oom_group access
> > >>> with atomic operations to avoid concurrency problems.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yue Zhao <findns94@gmail.com>
> > >>
> > >> Hi Yue!
> > >>
> > >> I'm curious, have any seen any real issues which your patch is solving?
> > >> Can you, please, provide a bit more details.
> > >>
> > >
> > > IMHO such details are not needed. oom_group is being accessed
> > > concurrently and one of them can be a write access. At least
> > > READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE is needed here.
> >
> > Needed for what?
> 
> For this particular case, documenting such an access. Though I don't
> think there are any architectures which may tear a one byte read/write
> and merging/refetching is not an issue for this.

Wouldn't a compiler be within its rights to implement a one byte store as:

	load-word
	modify-byte-in-word
	store-word

and if this is a lockless store to a word which has an adjacent byte also
being modified by another CPU, one of those CPUs can lose its store?
And WRITE_ONCE would prevent the compiler from implementing the store
in that way.



  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-21 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-20 15:16 [PATCH] mm: change memcg->oom_group access with atomic operations Yue Zhao
2023-02-20 21:09 ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-20 23:06   ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21  5:17     ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21  6:52       ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 13:51         ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2023-02-21 16:56           ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 18:23             ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 22:23               ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 22:38                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 23:13                   ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 23:38                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 23:57                       ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-22  0:37                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-22  4:28                           ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 17:47           ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 18:15             ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 18:18             ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-22  9:01           ` David Laight
2023-02-21 17:00         ` Martin Zhao
2023-02-21  7:22       ` Muchun Song
2023-02-21 17:48         ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 17:00       ` Martin Zhao
2023-02-21 18:02         ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21  8:26     ` Michal Hocko
2023-02-21 17:00       ` Martin Zhao

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Y/TMYa8DrocppXRu@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=findns94@gmail.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).