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;
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 128/191] kernel: sysctl: make drop_caches write-only
Date:   Thu,  2 Jan 2020 23:06:50 +0100
Message-Id: <20200102215843.444023100@linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200102215829.911231638@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20200102215829.911231638@linuxfoundation.org>
User-Agent: quilt/0.66
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>

[ Upstream commit 204cb79ad42f015312a5bbd7012d09c93d9b46fb ]

Currently, the drop_caches proc file and sysctl read back the last value
written, suggesting this is somehow a stateful setting instead of a
one-time command.  Make it write-only, like e.g.  compact_memory.

While mitigating a VM problem at scale in our fleet, there was confusion
about whether writing to this file will permanently switch the kernel into
a non-caching mode.  This influences the decision making in a tense
situation, where tens of people are trying to fix tens of thousands of
affected machines: Do we need a rollback strategy?  What are the
performance implications of operating in a non-caching state for several
days?  It also caused confusion when the kernel team said we may need to
write the file several times to make sure it's effective ("But it already
reads back 3?").

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191031221602.9375-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Acked-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/sysctl.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
index b6f2f35d0bcf..70665934d53e 100644
--- a/kernel/sysctl.c
+++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
@@ -1466,7 +1466,7 @@ static struct ctl_table vm_table[] = {
 		.procname	= "drop_caches",
 		.data		= &sysctl_drop_caches,
 		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
-		.mode		= 0644,
+		.mode		= 0200,
 		.proc_handler	= drop_caches_sysctl_handler,
 		.extra1		= SYSCTL_ONE,
 		.extra2		= &four,
-- 
2.20.1