linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] mm/khugepaged: fix race with folio split/free using temporary reference

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b827a7db-0cc5-423f-b50a-df3c41fb77a5@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 14:27:36 +0530
From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: ziy@...dia.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
 lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, npache@...hat.com,
 ryan.roberts@....com, fengwei.yin@...el.com, bharata@....com,
 syzbot+2b99589e33edbe9475ca@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] mm/khugepaged: fix race with folio split/free
 using temporary reference


On 27/05/25 2:10 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 27.05.25 10:06, Dev Jain wrote:
>>
>> On 27/05/25 1:18 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 27.05.25 05:20, Dev Jain wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 26/05/25 11:58 pm, Shivank Garg wrote:
>>>>> hpage_collapse_scan_file() calls is_refcount_suitable(), which in 
>>>>> turn
>>>>> calls folio_mapcount(). folio_mapcount() checks folio_test_large()
>>>>> before
>>>>> proceeding to folio_large_mapcount(), but there is a race window
>>>>> where the
>>>>> folio may get split/freed between these checks, triggering:
>>>>>
>>>>>      VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_large(folio), folio)
>>>>>
>>>>> Take a temporary reference to the folio in 
>>>>> hpage_collapse_scan_file().
>>>>> This stabilizes the folio during refcount check and prevents 
>>>>> incorrect
>>>>> large folio detection due to concurrent split/free. Use helper
>>>>> folio_expected_ref_count() + 1 to compare with folio_ref_count()
>>>>> instead of using is_refcount_suitable().
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 05c5323b2a34 ("mm: track mapcount of large folios in single
>>>>> value")
>>>>> Reported-by: syzbot+2b99589e33edbe9475ca@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>>>>> Closes:
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/6828470d.a70a0220.38f255.000c.GAE@google.com 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>>>>> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> The patch looks fine.
>>>>
>>>> I was just wondering about the implications of this on migration.
>>>> Earlier
>>>> we had a refcount race between migration and shmem page fault via
>>>> filemap_get_entry()
>>>> taking a reference and not releasing it till we take the folio lock,
>>>> which was held
>>>> by the migration path. I would like to *think* that real workloads,
>>>> when migrating
>>>> pages, will *not* be faulting on those pages simultaneously, just
>>>> guessing. But now
>>>> we have a kernel thread (khugepaged) racing against migration. I may
>>>> just be over-speculating.
>>>
>>> I'm not quite sure I understand the concern you have. Any temporary
>>> reference can temporarily block migration, however, the retry logic
>>> should be able to handle that just fine -- and this code is not really
>>> special (see filemap_get_entry()).
>>
>>
>> You are correct that any temp ref can block migration, however, that
>> reference has to come after the folios have been isolated in the
>> migration path.
>>
>> So the probability of someone taking a reference on the folio is quite
>> low since it has been isolated. The problem with filemap_get_entry() is
>> that it finds
>>
>> the folio in the pagecache, so isolation is useless, then takes a
>> reference and then shmem_get_folio_gfp() does a folio_lock() instead of
>> folio_try_lock().
>>
>> This was the race which I talked about an year back at [1]. My concern
>> is that we are adding another candidate to that race; just wondering if
>> there is
>>
>> a better solution to fix the race mentioned in Shivank's patchset.
>
> Note that in this code here, we're not locking the folio just yet, 
> we're only grabbing a reference for a very short time.


Ah now I notice that the reference is taken for a very short time.


>
> We will isolate+lock the folios in collapse_file(), where we also lock 
> all slots in the pagecache.
>
> The alternative would be to also lock all slots here, which is 
> arguably worse.


Makes sense.

Acked-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>