[PATCH bpf-next v4 2/3] bpf, arena: fix range_tree_set inconsistency on kmalloc_nolock failure

[chenyuan_fl@163.com]

From: Yuan Chen <chenyuan@kylinos.cn>

range_tree_set() pre-allocates the node needed for a brand-new range
before calling range_tree_clear(), so an allocation failure returns
-ENOMEM without having modified the tree (previously the overlapping
nodes were already removed by range_tree_clear() before the allocation
was attempted, permanently losing the cleared sub-ranges).

Signed-off-by: Yuan Chen <chenyuan@kylinos.cn>
---
 kernel/bpf/range_tree.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/range_tree.c b/kernel/bpf/range_tree.c
index 15b588377a76..54055b1fe541 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/range_tree.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/range_tree.c
@@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ int is_range_tree_set(struct range_tree *rt, u32 start, u32 len)
 int range_tree_set(struct range_tree *rt, u32 start, u32 len)
 {
 	u32 last = start + len - 1;
+	struct range_node *new_rn = NULL;
 	struct range_node *right;
 	struct range_node *left;
 	int err;
@@ -208,20 +209,40 @@ int range_tree_set(struct range_tree *rt, u32 start, u32 len)
 	if (left && left->rn_start <= start && left->rn_last >= last)
 		return 0;
 
+	/*
+	 * A new node is needed only when the range has no adjacent free
+	 * range on either side.  This is known before clearing: any range
+	 * covering start - 1 or last + 1 survives the clear as an adjacent
+	 * piece.  Allocate only in that case, before modifying the tree, so
+	 * a failure leaves the range tree unmodified
+	 */
+	left = range_it_iter_first(rt, start - 1, start - 1);
+	right = range_it_iter_first(rt, last + 1, last + 1);
+	if (!left && !right) {
+		new_rn = kmalloc_nolock(sizeof(struct range_node),
+					__GFP_ACCOUNT, NUMA_NO_NODE);
+		if (!new_rn)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+
 	/* Clear out everything in the range we want to set. */
 	err = range_tree_clear(rt, start, len);
 	if (err)
-		return err;
+		goto out_free_new;
 
 	/* Do we have a left-adjacent range ? */
 	left = range_it_iter_first(rt, start - 1, start - 1);
-	if (left && left->rn_last + 1 != start)
-		return -EFAULT;
+	if (left && left->rn_last + 1 != start) {
+		err = -EFAULT;
+		goto out_free_new;
+	}
 
 	/* Do we have a right-adjacent range ? */
 	right = range_it_iter_first(rt, last + 1, last + 1);
-	if (right && right->rn_start != last + 1)
-		return -EFAULT;
+	if (right && right->rn_start != last + 1) {
+		err = -EFAULT;
+		goto out_free_new;
+	}
 
 	if (left && right) {
 		/* Combine left and right adjacent ranges */
@@ -241,14 +262,16 @@ int range_tree_set(struct range_tree *rt, u32 start, u32 len)
 		right->rn_start = start;
 		range_it_insert(right, rt);
 	} else {
-		left = kmalloc_nolock(sizeof(struct range_node), __GFP_ACCOUNT, NUMA_NO_NODE);
-		if (!left)
-			return -ENOMEM;
-		left->rn_start = start;
-		left->rn_last = last;
-		range_it_insert(left, rt);
+		/* No adjacent ranges; use the pre-allocated node */
+		new_rn->rn_start = start;
+		new_rn->rn_last = last;
+		range_it_insert(new_rn, rt);
 	}
 	return 0;
+
+out_free_new:
+	kfree_nolock(new_rn);
+	return err;
 }
 
 void range_tree_destroy(struct range_tree *rt)
-- 
2.54.0