Re: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: stop resize loop if limit was changed again

[Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>]

On 3/20/24 06:03, Pavel Tikhomirov wrote:
> In memory_max_write() we first set memcg->memory.max and only then
> try to enforce it in loop. What if while we are in loop someone else
> have changed memcg->memory.max but we are still trying to enforce
> the old value? I believe this can lead to nasty consequence like getting
> an oom on perfectly fine cgroup within it's limits or excess reclaim.

Concurrent write to the same cgroup control file is not possible as the 
underlying kernfs_open_file structure has a mutex that serialize access 
to the file. Concurrent write to different cgroup control files is 
possible, though.

Cheers,
Longman

>
> We also have exactly the same thing in memory_high_write().
>
> So let's stop enforcing old limits if we already have a new ones.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com>
> ---
>   mm/memcontrol.c | 6 ++++++
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 61932c9215e7..81b303728491 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -6769,6 +6769,9 @@ static ssize_t memory_high_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>   		unsigned long nr_pages = page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
>   		unsigned long reclaimed;
>   
> +		if (memcg->memory.high != high)
> +			break;
> +
>   		if (nr_pages <= high)
>   			break;
>   
> @@ -6817,6 +6820,9 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>   	for (;;) {
>   		unsigned long nr_pages = page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
>   
> +		if (memcg->memory.max != max)
> +			break;
> +
>   		if (nr_pages <= max)
>   			break;
>