Re: [PATCH] assoc_array: discard shortcut when collapsing a leaf-only node

[Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 05:05:48PM +0900, Daehyeon Ko wrote:
> assoc_array_delete() can collapse a subtree into a node that contains only
> leaves while retaining the shortcut that led to it.  If that node later
> fills, all_leaves_cluster_together replaces it with another shortcut.  The
> first shortcut then points directly to the second one.
> 
> assoc_array_apply_edit() publishes this topology and propagates branch
> counts from the new child node.  It skips the inner shortcut, encounters
> the outer shortcut where it requires a node and triggers the BUG_ON().
> 
> Linux v7.2 and v6.12.105 are affected.  The same root remains at the
> base-commit below and in every supported stable branch checked down to
> 5.10.  It requires CONFIG_KEYS, but no capability, user namespace or race.
> A UID/GID 1000 process produced:
> 
>   CONTROL_BEGIN mode=exact uid=1000 gid=1000
>   CONTROL_CapEff: 0000000000000000
>   kernel BUG at lib/assoc_array.c:1388!
>   Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI
>   CPU: 0 UID: 1000 PID: 154 Comm: exploit
>   RIP: assoc_array_apply_edit+0x4aa/0x690
>   Call Trace:
>    __key_link
>    __key_instantiate_and_link
>    __key_create_or_update
>    __do_sys_add_key
>   Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception
> 
> When deletion produces a leaf-only node, bypass its preceding shortcut as
> garbage collection already does.  Retire the shortcut and old node together
> after an RCU grace period; reused leaves keep their references and the
> deleted leaf is still freed separately.
> 
> The exact trigger reached the BUG in 3/3 unmodified v7.2 KASAN boots and
> completed cleanly in 3/3 fixed boots.  Fixed v6.12.105 also passed 3/3.  A
> source reproducer is available privately on request.
> 
> Fixes: 3cb989501c26 ("Add a generic associative array implementation.")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Daehyeon Ko <4ncienth@gmail.com>
> ---
>  lib/assoc_array.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/assoc_array.c b/lib/assoc_array.c
> index b6c9723e12ced..841dfe07dc962 100644
> --- a/lib/assoc_array.c
> +++ b/lib/assoc_array.c
> @@ -1210,8 +1210,22 @@ found_leaf:
>  				goto enomem;
>  			edit->new_meta[0] = assoc_array_node_to_ptr(new_n0);
>  
> -			new_n0->back_pointer = node->back_pointer;
> -			new_n0->parent_slot = node->parent_slot;
> +			/* A shortcut above a leaf-only node is redundant.  Drop it as
> +			 * GC does so that a later split can't create two shortcuts in a row.
> +			 */
> +			ptr = node->back_pointer;
> +			if (assoc_array_ptr_is_shortcut(ptr)) {
> +				struct assoc_array_shortcut *s =
> +					assoc_array_ptr_to_shortcut(ptr);
> +
> +				new_n0->back_pointer = s->back_pointer;
> +				new_n0->parent_slot = s->parent_slot;
> +				edit->excised_subtree = ptr;
> +			} else {
> +				new_n0->back_pointer = ptr;
> +				new_n0->parent_slot = node->parent_slot;
> +				edit->excised_subtree = assoc_array_node_to_ptr(node);
> +			}
>  			new_n0->nr_leaves_on_branch = node->nr_leaves_on_branch;
>  			edit->adjust_count_on = new_n0;
>  
> @@ -1225,21 +1239,15 @@ found_leaf:
>  			pr_devel("collapsed %d,%lu\n", collapse.slot, new_n0->nr_leaves_on_branch);
>  			BUG_ON(collapse.slot != new_n0->nr_leaves_on_branch - 1);
>  
> -			if (!node->back_pointer) {
> +			if (!new_n0->back_pointer) {
>  				edit->set[1].ptr = &array->root;
> -			} else if (assoc_array_ptr_is_leaf(node->back_pointer)) {
> -				BUG();
> -			} else if (assoc_array_ptr_is_node(node->back_pointer)) {
> -				struct assoc_array_node *p =
> -					assoc_array_ptr_to_node(node->back_pointer);
> -				edit->set[1].ptr = &p->slots[node->parent_slot];
> -			} else if (assoc_array_ptr_is_shortcut(node->back_pointer)) {
> -				struct assoc_array_shortcut *s =
> -					assoc_array_ptr_to_shortcut(node->back_pointer);
> -				edit->set[1].ptr = &s->next_node;
> +			} else {
> +				struct assoc_array_node *p;
> +
> +				p = assoc_array_ptr_to_node(new_n0->back_pointer);
> +				edit->set[1].ptr = &p->slots[new_n0->parent_slot];
>  			}
>  			edit->set[1].to = assoc_array_node_to_ptr(new_n0);
> -			edit->excised_subtree = assoc_array_node_to_ptr(node);
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> 
> base-commit: 165768bb70265b5c38cf0b73fafd75be235f8b14
> -- 
> 2.55.0
> 

David, could you check up on this patch? I think you have a better
judgement here.

Br, Jarkko