linux-kernel - [v2 PATCH 2/2] mm: don't warn if the node is offlined

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]
Message-Id: <20221103213641.7296-2-shy828301@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu,  3 Nov 2022 14:36:41 -0700
From:   Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
To:     zokeefe@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     shy828301@...il.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [v2 PATCH 2/2] mm: don't warn if the node is offlined

Syzbot reported the below splat:

WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3646 at include/linux/gfp.h:221 __alloc_pages_node
include/linux/gfp.h:221 [inline]
WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3646 at include/linux/gfp.h:221
hpage_collapse_alloc_page mm/khugepaged.c:807 [inline]
WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3646 at include/linux/gfp.h:221
alloc_charge_hpage+0x802/0xaa0 mm/khugepaged.c:963
Modules linked in:
CPU: 1 PID: 3646 Comm: syz-executor210 Not tainted
6.1.0-rc1-syzkaller-00454-ga70385240892 #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
Google 10/11/2022
RIP: 0010:__alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:221 [inline]
RIP: 0010:hpage_collapse_alloc_page mm/khugepaged.c:807 [inline]
RIP: 0010:alloc_charge_hpage+0x802/0xaa0 mm/khugepaged.c:963
Code: e5 01 4c 89 ee e8 6e f9 ae ff 4d 85 ed 0f 84 28 fc ff ff e8 70 fc
ae ff 48 8d 6b ff 4c 8d 63 07 e9 16 fc ff ff e8 5e fc ae ff <0f> 0b e9
96 fa ff ff 41 bc 1a 00 00 00 e9 86 fd ff ff e8 47 fc ae
RSP: 0018:ffffc90003fdf7d8 EFLAGS: 00010293
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000
RDX: ffff888077f457c0 RSI: ffffffff81cd8f42 RDI: 0000000000000001
RBP: ffff888079388c0c R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
FS:  00007f6b48ccf700(0000) GS:ffff8880b9b00000(0000)
knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007f6b48a819f0 CR3: 00000000171e7000 CR4: 00000000003506e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
 <TASK>
 collapse_file+0x1ca/0x5780 mm/khugepaged.c:1715
 hpage_collapse_scan_file+0xd6c/0x17a0 mm/khugepaged.c:2156
 madvise_collapse+0x53a/0xb40 mm/khugepaged.c:2611
 madvise_vma_behavior+0xd0a/0x1cc0 mm/madvise.c:1066
 madvise_walk_vmas+0x1c7/0x2b0 mm/madvise.c:1240
 do_madvise.part.0+0x24a/0x340 mm/madvise.c:1419
 do_madvise mm/madvise.c:1432 [inline]
 __do_sys_madvise mm/madvise.c:1432 [inline]
 __se_sys_madvise mm/madvise.c:1430 [inline]
 __x64_sys_madvise+0x113/0x150 mm/madvise.c:1430
 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
 do_syscall_64+0x35/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
RIP: 0033:0x7f6b48a4eef9
Code: 28 00 00 00 75 05 48 83 c4 28 c3 e8 b1 15 00 00 90 48 89 f8 48 89
f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01
f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 b8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
RSP: 002b:00007f6b48ccf318 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000001c
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f6b48af0048 RCX: 00007f6b48a4eef9
RDX: 0000000000000019 RSI: 0000000000600003 RDI: 0000000020000000
RBP: 00007f6b48af0040 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007f6b48aa53a4
R13: 00007f6b48bffcbf R14: 00007f6b48ccf400 R15: 0000000000022000
 </TASK>

It is because khugepaged allocates pages with __GFP_THISNODE, but the
preferred node is offlined.  The previous patch fixed the khugepaged
code to avoid allocating page from non-existing node.  But it is still
racy against memory hotremove.  There is no synchronization with the
memory hotplug so it is possible that memory gets offline during a
longer taking scanning.

So this warning still seems not quite helpful because:
  * There is no guarantee the node is online for __GFP_THISNODE context
    for all the callsites.
  * Kernel just fails the allocation regardless the warning, and it looks
    all callsites handle the allocation failure gracefully.

It is actually even harmful for those running in panic-on-warn mode.  So
removing the warning seems like a good move.

Reported-by: syzbot+0044b22d177870ee974f@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
---
v2: * Added patch 1/2.
    * Reworded the commit log per Michal.

 include/linux/gfp.h | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
index ef4aea3b356e..594d6dee5646 100644
--- a/include/linux/gfp.h
+++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
@@ -218,7 +218,6 @@ static inline struct page *
 __alloc_pages_node(int nid, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
 {
 	VM_BUG_ON(nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES);
-	VM_WARN_ON((gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid));
 
 	return __alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, nid, NULL);
 }
@@ -227,7 +226,6 @@ static inline
 struct folio *__folio_alloc_node(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order, int nid)
 {
 	VM_BUG_ON(nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES);
-	VM_WARN_ON((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid));
 
 	return __folio_alloc(gfp, order, nid, NULL);
 }
-- 
2.26.3