[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YufQQQyUmn4y+CYX@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 15:08:17 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@...cinc.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com,
quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
sjpark@...zon.de, sieberf@...zon.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
dhowells@...hat.com, willy@...radead.org, minchan@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] mm: fix use-after free of page_ext after race with
memory-offline
On Mon 01-08-22 18:31:45, Charan Teja Kalla wrote:
[...]
> >> The roll back operation in the online_page_ext(), where we free the
> >> allocated page_ext's, will not have the PAGE_EXT_INVALID flag thus
> >> WARN() may not work here. no?
> > Wouldn't ms->page_ext be NULL in that case?
> I don't think that ms->page_ext would be NULL here.
> online_page_ext():
> (a) for (pfn = start; !fail && pfn < end; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION)
> fail = init_section_page_ext():
> ms->page_ext = (void *)base - page_ext_size * pfn;
>
> //If fail = -ERROR in the middle, roll back operation.
> (b) for (pfn = start; pfn < end; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION)
> __free_page_ext();
>
> Here (b) can be called on the sections without PAGE_EXT_INVALID with
> ms->page_ext != NULL.
>
You are right. My sloppy code reading. A tiny comment would be nice.
Because this shouldn't really happen for normal calls.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists