Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 13 Jun 2022 23:48:44 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org
Subject: Re: Linux 5.18-rc4
Message-ID: <Yqe+zE4f7uo8YdBE@casper.infradead.org>
References: <CAHk-=whmtHMzjaVUF9bS+7vE_rrRctcCTvsAeB8fuLYcyYLN-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <226cee6a-6ca1-b603-db08-8500cd8f77b7@gnuweeb.org>
 <CAHk-=whayT+o58FrPCXVVJ3Bn-3SeoDkMA77TOd9jg4yMGNExw@mail.gmail.com>
 <87r1414y5v.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <CAHk-=wijAnOcC2qQEAvFtRD_xpPbG+aSUXkfM-nFTHuMmPbZGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <266e648a-c537-66bc-455b-37105567c942@canonical.com>
 <Yp5iOlrgELc9SkSI@casper.infradead.org>
 <dd654ee2-ae10-e247-f98b-f5057dbb380b@canonical.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <dd654ee2-ae10-e247-f98b-f5057dbb380b@canonical.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 02:00:33PM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
> On 6/6/22 13:23, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 12:19:36PM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
> >>> I suspect that part is that both Apparmor and IPC use the idr local lock.
> >>>
> >> bingo,
> >>
> >> apparmor moved its secids allocation from a custom radix tree to idr in
> >>
> >>   99cc45e48678 apparmor: Use an IDR to allocate apparmor secids
> >>
> >> and ipc is using the idr for its id allocation as well
> >>
> >> I can easily lift the secid() allocation out of the ctx->lock but that
> >> would still leave it happening under the file_lock and not fix the problem.
> >> I think the quick solution would be for apparmor to stop using idr, reverting
> >> back at least temporarily to the custom radix tree.
> > 
> > How about moving forward to the XArray that doesn't use that horrid
> > prealloc gunk?  Compile tested only.
> > 
> 
> I'm not very familiar with XArray but it does seem like a good fit. We do try
> to keep the secid allocation dense, ideally no holes. Wrt the current locking
> issue I want to hear what Thomas has to say. Regardless I am looking into
> whether we should just switch to XArrays going forward.

Nothing from Thomas ... shall we just go with this?  Do you want a
commit message, etc for the patch?