Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 9 May 2018 16:40:16 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, mingo@kernel.org,
        paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@chromium.org, riel@redhat.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
        marcos.souza.org@gmail.com, hoeun.ryu@gmail.com,
        pasha.tatashin@oracle.com, gs051095@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
        rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg
Message-ID: <20180509144016.GA25742@redhat.com>
References: <20180503133338.GA23401@redhat.com>
 <87y3h0x0qg.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180504142056.GA26151@redhat.com>
 <87r2mrh4is.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180504145435.GA26573@redhat.com>
 <87y3gzfmjt.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180504162209.GB26573@redhat.com>
 <871serfk77.fsf@xmission.com>
 <20180507143358.GA3071@redhat.com>
 <87vabyvnw0.fsf@xmission.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87vabyvnw0.fsf@xmission.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 05/07, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > before your patch get_mem_cgroup_from_mm() looks at mm->owner == current
> > (in this case) and mem_cgroup_from_task() should return the correct memcg
> > even if execing task migrates after bprm_mm_init(). At least in the common
> > case when the old mm is not shared.
> >
> > After your patch the memory allocations in copy_strings() won't be accounted
> > correctly, bprm->mm->memcg is wrong if this task migrates. And iiuc your recent
> > "[PATCH 2/2] memcg: Close the race between migration and installing bprm->mm as mm"
> > doesn't fix the problem.
> >
> > No?
>
> The patch does solve the issue.  There should be nothing a userspace
> process can observe that should tell it where in the middle of exec
> such a migration happend so placing the migration at what from the
> kernel's perspective might be technically later should not be a problem.
>
> If it is a problem the issue is that there is a way to observe the
> difference.

So. The task migrates from some MEMCG right after bprm_mm_init().

copy_strings() triggers OOM in MEMCG. This is quite possible, it can use a lot
of memory and that is why we have acct_arg_size() to make these allocations
visible to oom killer.

task_in_mem_cgroup(MEMCG) returns false and oom killer has to kill another
innocent process in MEMCG.

Does this look like a way to observe the difference?

> > Perhaps we can change get_mem_cgroup_from_mm() to use
> > mem_cgroup_from_css(current, memory_cgrp_id) if mm->memcg == NULL?
>
> Please God no.  Having any unnecessary special case is just going to
> confuse people and cause bugs.

To me the unnecessary special case is the new_mm->memcg which is used for
accounting but doesn't follow migration till exec_mmap(). But I won't argue.

Oleg.