linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv5 09/17] mm/sparse: Check memmap alignment for compound_info_has

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <8CDE3AB8-EF51-4D53-A1D2-6084A7613E9A@linux.dev>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 15:03:21 +0800
From: Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
Cc: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
 Usama Arif <usamaarif642@...il.com>,
 Frank van der Linden <fvdl@...gle.com>,
 Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
 Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
 Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
 WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>,
 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
 Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
 Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>,
 kernel-team@...a.com,
 linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 09/17] mm/sparse: Check memmap alignment for
 compound_info_has_mask()



> On Jan 29, 2026, at 11:29, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com> wrote:
> 
> On 28 Jan 2026, at 22:23, Muchun Song wrote:
> 
>>> On Jan 29, 2026, at 11:10, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 28 Jan 2026, at 22:00, Muchun Song wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 28, 2026, at 21:54, Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> If page->compound_info encodes a mask, it is expected that vmemmap to be
>>>>> naturally aligned to the maximum folio size.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Trigger a BUG() for CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y or WARN() otherwise.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org>
>>>>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> mm/sparse.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>>>> 
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> index b5b2b6f7041b..9c0f4015778c 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> @@ -600,6 +600,19 @@ void __init sparse_init(void)
>>>>> BUILD_BUG_ON(!is_power_of_2(sizeof(struct mem_section)));
>>>>> memblocks_present();
>>>>> 
>>>>> +  if (compound_info_has_mask()) {
>>>>> +   unsigned long alignment;
>>>>> +   bool aligned;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +   alignment = MAX_FOLIO_NR_PAGES * sizeof(struct page);
>>>>> +   aligned = IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long) pfn_to_page(0), alignment);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +   if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_VM))
>>>>> +   BUG_ON(!aligned);
>>>>> +   else
>>>>> +   WARN_ON(!aligned);
>>>> 
>>>> Since you’ve fixed all the problematic architectures, I don’t believe
>>>> we’ll ever hit the WARN or BUG here anymore.
>>>> 
>>>> I think we can now simplify the code further and just use VM_BUG_ON:
>>>> if any architecture changes in the future, the misalignment will be
>>>> caught during testing, so we won’t need to worry about it at run-time.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> VM_WARN_ON should be sufficient, since bots should report warnings
>>> from any patch/change.
>> 
>> I’m not sure a WARN will get developers’ attention, since the message
>> is unlikely to have any visible consequences and only fires on
>> allocations with a special order.
> 
> If a developer misses the WARN and the patch gets into linux-mm or linux-next,
> kernel test robot runs selftests on the kernel and reports any warnings
> to the mailing list. Do we have any related test in selftests/mm? That should
> help us catch anything if a developer does not catch it.

I looked at the selftest and it doesn’t seem to have a test that
allocates at MAX_FOLIO_ORDER and checks that it works correctly.

> 
> Best Regards,
> Yan, Zi