linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/9] mm/shmem, swap: remove redundant error handling for replacing folio

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: <20250822192023.13477-6-ryncsn@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 03:20:19 +0800
From: Kairui Song <ryncsn@...il.com>
To: linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>,
	Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
	Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
	Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
	Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Ying Huang <ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5/9] mm/shmem, swap: remove redundant error handling for replacing folio

From: Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>

Shmem may replace a folio in the swap cache if the cached one doesn't
fit the swapin's GFP zone. When doing so, shmem has already double
checked that the swap cache folio is locked, still has the swap cache
flag set, and contains the wanted swap entry. So it is impossible to
fail due to an Xarray mismatch. There is even a comment for that.

Delete the defensive error handling path, and add a WARN_ON instead:
if that happened, something has broken the basic principle of how the
swap cache works, we should catch and fix that.

Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>
---
 mm/shmem.c | 28 +++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
index b4d39f2a1e0a..e03793cc5169 100644
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -2158,35 +2158,13 @@ static int shmem_replace_folio(struct folio **foliop, gfp_t gfp,
 	/* Swap cache still stores N entries instead of a high-order entry */
 	xa_lock_irq(&swap_mapping->i_pages);
 	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) {
-		void *item = xas_load(&xas);
-
-		if (item != old) {
-			error = -ENOENT;
-			break;
-		}
-
-		xas_store(&xas, new);
+		WARN_ON_ONCE(xas_store(&xas, new));
 		xas_next(&xas);
 	}
-	if (!error) {
-		mem_cgroup_replace_folio(old, new);
-		shmem_update_stats(new, nr_pages);
-		shmem_update_stats(old, -nr_pages);
-	}
 	xa_unlock_irq(&swap_mapping->i_pages);
 
-	if (unlikely(error)) {
-		/*
-		 * Is this possible?  I think not, now that our callers
-		 * check both the swapcache flag and folio->private
-		 * after getting the folio lock; but be defensive.
-		 * Reverse old to newpage for clear and free.
-		 */
-		old = new;
-	} else {
-		folio_add_lru(new);
-		*foliop = new;
-	}
+	folio_add_lru(new);
+	*foliop = new;
 
 	folio_clear_swapcache(old);
 	old->private = NULL;
-- 
2.51.0