From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "SeongJae Park" <sj@kernel.org>
Cc: damon@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/damon/ops-common: call folio_test_lru() after folio_get()
Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 19:57:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260523195707.6CB2C1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260523194145.93122-1-sj@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Speculative folio flag access occurs before pointer re-validation, triggering VM_BUG_ON_PGFLAGS() on tail pages.
--
commit 119755fb3390d2b7d6c7f2278054cc95e95531c6
Author: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
mm/damon/ops-common: call folio_test_lru() after folio_get()
This patch attempts to fix a potential VM_BUG_ON_PGFLAGS crash by removing
the speculative LRU flag check before trying to get a reference in
damon_get_folio(). It moves the LRU check after a successful try_get.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20260517234112.89245-1-sj@kernel.org
> diff --git a/mm/damon/ops-common.c b/mm/damon/ops-common.c
> index 3a0ddc3ac7196..d3404615f9b75 100644
> --- a/mm/damon/ops-common.c
> +++ b/mm/damon/ops-common.c
> @@ -32,9 +32,9 @@ struct folio *damon_get_folio(unsigned long pfn)
> return NULL;
>
> folio = page_folio(page);
> - if (!folio_test_lru(folio) || !folio_try_get(folio))
> + if (!folio_try_get(folio))
> return NULL;
> - if (unlikely(page_folio(page) != folio || !folio_test_lru(folio))) {
> + if (!folio_test_lru(folio) || unlikely(page_folio(page) != folio)) {
[Severity: High]
Does this sequence reintroduce the same bug the patch intends to fix?
By placing the LRU flag check before the pointer re-validation, C
short-circuit evaluation will evaluate the LRU flag first.
If the page was concurrently freed and reallocated as a tail page,
folio_try_get() might still succeed. Evaluating the LRU flag on this
unvalidated tail page will trigger the VM_BUG_ON_PGFLAGS() in
const_folio_flags().
Should the pointer re-validation happen before accessing any folio flags in
PFN scanners?
> folio_put(folio);
> folio = NULL;
> }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260523194145.93122-1-sj@kernel.org?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-23 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-23 19:41 [RFC PATCH] mm/damon/ops-common: call folio_test_lru() after folio_get() SeongJae Park
2026-05-23 19:57 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-05-23 20:26 ` SeongJae Park
2026-05-23 20:31 ` SeongJae Park
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260523195707.6CB2C1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=damon@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox