linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] hugetlb: pass head page to remove_hugetlb

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2097f731-0b72-a5bc-1011-09447089a81b@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 May 2021 09:28:51 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] hugetlb: pass head page to remove_hugetlb_page()

On 5/26/21 4:52 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> From: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
> 
> When memory_failure() or soft_offline_page() is called on a tail page of
> some hugetlb page, "BUG: unable to handle page fault" error can be
> triggered.
> 
> remove_hugetlb_page() dereferences page->lru, so it's assumed that the
> page points to a head page, but one of the caller,
> dissolve_free_huge_page(), provides remove_hugetlb_page() with 'page'
> which could be a tail page.  So pass 'head' to it, instead.
> 
> Fixes: 6eb4e88a6d27 ("hugetlb: create remove_hugetlb_page() to separate functionality")
> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@....com>
> ---
>  mm/hugetlb.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git v5.13-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c v5.13-rc3_patched/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 95918f410c0f..470f7b5b437e 100644
> --- v5.13-rc3/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ v5.13-rc3_patched/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -1793,7 +1793,7 @@ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page)
>  			SetPageHWPoison(page);
>  			ClearPageHWPoison(head);
>  		}
> -		remove_hugetlb_page(h, page, false);
> +		remove_hugetlb_page(h, head, false);
>  		h->max_huge_pages--;
>  		spin_unlock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
>  		update_and_free_page(h, head);
> 

I believe we have the same problem later in the routine when calling
add_hugetlb_page()?

If so, should we combine the changes?  Or, do we need two patches as
the bugs were introduced with different commits?
-- 
Mike Kravetz