[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230708174620.8ef2109908f9606f3e4c090e@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2023 17:46:20 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: hugetlb_vmemmap: fix a race between vmemmap pmd
split
On Sat, 8 Jul 2023 09:42:57 +0800 Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 8, 2023, at 03:38, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 11:38:59 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The local variable @page in __split_vmemmap_huge_pmd() to obtain a pmd
> >> page without holding page_table_lock may possiblely get the page table
> >> page instead of a huge pmd page. The effect may be in set_pte_at()
> >> since we may pass an invalid page struct, if set_pte_at() wants to
> >> access the page struct (e.g. CONFIG_PAGE_TABLE_CHECK is enabled), it
> >> may crash the kernel. So fix it. And inline __split_vmemmap_huge_pmd()
> >> since it only has one user.
> >
> > Is this likely enough to justify a backport?
> >
> > I'm thinking "add cc:stable and merge into 6.6-rc1", so it hits -stable
> > after a couple of months of testing.
> >
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> It is better to backport it to stable. Could you help me add it?
>
I have added cc:stable to this and I have staged it for 6.6-rc1.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists