[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250226200016.GB3949421@google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 20:00:16 +0000
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
syzbot+1a517ccfcbc6a7ab0f82@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: zswap: fix crypto_free_acomp() deadlock in
zswap_cpu_comp_dead()
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 06:56:25PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> Currently, zswap_cpu_comp_dead() calls crypto_free_acomp() while holding
> the per-CPU acomp_ctx mutex. crypto_free_acomp() then holds scomp_lock
> (through crypto_exit_scomp_ops_async()).
>
> On the other hand, crypto_alloc_acomp_node() holds the scomp_lock
> (through crypto_scomp_init_tfm()), and then allocates memory.
> If the allocation results in reclaim, we may attempt to hold the per-CPU
> acomp_ctx mutex.
The bug is in acomp. crypto_free_acomp() should never have to wait for a memory
allocation. That is what needs to be fixed.
But really the bounce buffering in acomp (which is what is causing this problem)
should not exist at all. There is really no practical use case for it; it's
just there because of the Crypto API's insistence on shoehorning everything into
scatterlists for no reason...
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists