linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/7] mm: khugepaged: retract_page_tables() use pte_offset_map

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: <e59f6f47-4a19-4726-a3ab-c13ada04d723@bytedance.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 10:15:26 +0800
From: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: david@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de,
 muchun.song@...ux.dev, vbabka@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 zokeefe@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com, peterx@...hat.com,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/7] mm: khugepaged: retract_page_tables() use
 pte_offset_map_lock()



On 2024/10/18 02:00, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 11:47 AM Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com> wrote:
>> In retract_page_tables(), we may modify the pmd entry after acquiring the
>> pml and ptl, so we should also check whether the pmd entry is stable.
>> Using pte_offset_map_lock() to do it, and then we can also remove the
>> calling of the pte_lockptr().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
>> ---
>>   mm/khugepaged.c | 9 ++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
>> index 94feb85ce996c..b4f49d323c8d9 100644
>> --- a/mm/khugepaged.c
>> +++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
>> @@ -1721,6 +1721,7 @@ static void retract_page_tables(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t pgoff)
>>                  spinlock_t *pml;
>>                  spinlock_t *ptl;
>>                  bool skipped_uffd = false;
>> +               pte_t *pte;
>>
>>                  /*
>>                   * Check vma->anon_vma to exclude MAP_PRIVATE mappings that
>> @@ -1757,9 +1758,15 @@ static void retract_page_tables(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t pgoff)
>>                  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range);
>>
>>                  pml = pmd_lock(mm, pmd);
>> -               ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
>> +               pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
> 
> This takes the lock "ptl" on the success path...
> 
>> +               if (!pte) {
>> +                       spin_unlock(pml);
>> +                       mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(&range);
>> +                       continue;
>> +               }
>>                  if (ptl != pml)
>>                          spin_lock_nested(ptl, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
> 
> ... and this takes the same lock again, right? I think this will

Oh my god, my mistake, I used pte_offset_map_rw_nolock() at first, then
I changed it to pte_offset_map_lock() but forgot to delete this, and
because my test did not trigger retract_page_tables(), so I did not
find this error.

Will change in v2.

Thanks!

> deadlock on kernels with CONFIG_SPLIT_PTE_PTLOCKS=y. Did you test this
> on a machine with less than 4 CPU cores, or something like that? Or am
> I missing something?