[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240926154234.2247217-1-david@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 17:42:34 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
syzbot+bf2c35fa302ebe3c7471@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1] mm/huge_memory: check pmd_special() only after pmd_present()
We should only check for pmd_special() after we made sure that we
have a present PMD. For example, if we have a migration PMD,
pmd_special() might indicate that we have a special PMD although we
really don't.
This fixes confusing migration entries as PFN mappings, and not
doing what we are supposed to do in the "is_swap_pmd()" case further
down in the function -- including messing up COW, page table handling
and accounting.
Reported-by: syzbot+bf2c35fa302ebe3c7471@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/66f15c8d.050a0220.c23dd.000f.GAE@google.com/
Fixes: bc02afbd4d73 ("mm/fork: accept huge pfnmap entries")
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
---
I yet have to do more testing, but sending this out already.
---
mm/huge_memory.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 0580ac9e47b9..e55efcad1e6c 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -1586,7 +1586,7 @@ int copy_huge_pmd(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, struct mm_struct *src_mm,
int ret = -ENOMEM;
pmd = pmdp_get_lockless(src_pmd);
- if (unlikely(pmd_special(pmd))) {
+ if (unlikely(pmd_present(pmd) && pmd_special(pmd))) {
dst_ptl = pmd_lock(dst_mm, dst_pmd);
src_ptl = pmd_lockptr(src_mm, src_pmd);
spin_lock_nested(src_ptl, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
--
2.46.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists