linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm: fix missing wake-up event for FSDAX pages

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:47:32 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, jgg@...pe.ca,
        jhubbard@...dia.com, william.kucharski@...cle.com,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, jack@...e.cz, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: fix missing wake-up event for FSDAX pages

On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 04:47:10PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 00:38:41 +0100 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 02:18:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue,  5 Jul 2022 20:35:32 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > FSDAX page refcounts are 1-based, rather than 0-based: if refcount is
> > > > 1, then the page is freed.  The FSDAX pages can be pinned through GUP,
> > > > then they will be unpinned via unpin_user_page() using a folio variant
> > > > to put the page, however, folio variants did not consider this special
> > > > case, the result will be to miss a wakeup event (like the user of
> > > > __fuse_dax_break_layouts()).  Since FSDAX pages are only possible get
> > > > by GUP users, so fix GUP instead of folio_put() to lower overhead.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > What are the user visible runtime effects of this bug?
> > 
> > "missing wake up event" seems pretty obvious to me?  Something goes to
> > sleep waiting for a page to become unused, and is never woken.
> 
> No, missed wakeups are often obscured by another wakeup coming in
> shortly afterwards.
> 

I need to clarify the task will never be woken up.

> If this wakeup is not one of these, then are there reports from the
> softlockup detector?
> 
> Do we have reports of processes permanently stuck in D state?
>

No. The task is in an TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state (see __fuse_dax_break_layouts). 
The hung task reporter only reports D task (TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE).

Thanks.
>