linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: fix kernel NULL pointer dereference when replacing free hugetlb folios

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: <ff6bd560-d249-418f-81f4-7cbe055a25ec@126.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 19:34:56 +0800
From: Ge Yang <yangge1116@....com>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, 21cnbao@...il.com,
 david@...hat.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, liuzixing@...on.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: fix kernel NULL pointer dereference when
 replacing free hugetlb folios



在 2025/5/22 13:34, Oscar Salvador 写道:
> On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 11:47:05AM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
>> Thanks for fixing this problem. BTW, in order to catch future similar problem,
>> it is better to add WARN_ON into folio_hstate() to assert if hugetlb_lock
>> is not held when folio's reference count is zero. For this fix, LGTM.
> 
> Why cannot we put all the burden in alloc_and_dissolve_hugetlb_folio(),
> which will again check things under the lock?
> I mean, I would be ok to save cycles and check upfront in
> replace_free_hugepage_folios(), but the latter has only one user which
> is alloc_contig_range(), which is not really an expected-to-be optimized
> function.
> 
>   diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
>   index bd8971388236..b4d937732256 100644
>   --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
>   +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
>   @@ -2924,13 +2924,6 @@ int replace_free_hugepage_folios(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>   
>    	while (start_pfn < end_pfn) {
>    		folio = pfn_folio(start_pfn);
>   -		if (folio_test_hugetlb(folio)) {
>   -			h = folio_hstate(folio);
>   -		} else {
>   -			start_pfn++;
>   -			continue;
>   -		}
>   -
>    		if (!folio_ref_count(folio)) {
>    			ret = alloc_and_dissolve_hugetlb_folio(h, folio,
>    							       &isolate_list);
> 
>   
> 
It seems that we cannot simply remove the folio_test_hugetlb() check. 
The reasons are as follows:

1）If we remove it, we will be unable to obtain the hstat corresponding 
to the folio, and consequently, we won't be able to call 
alloc_and_dissolve_hugetlb_folio().

2）The alloc_and_dissolve_hugetlb_folio() function is also called within 
the isolate_or_dissolve_huge_folio() function. However, the 
folio_test_hugetlb() check within the isolate_or_dissolve_huge_folio() 
function cannot be removed.