From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B22361645; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 19:35:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772825711; cv=none; b=lKLU/nSV1A1kqhoIgXZ0foD1cQs7a5v8FaoV1vDRKeSMfXZIA61dyyXqEYBukWJlsk//JIr1vq3iMq6j3D2Sx1FDD5ZzhgnDUr6VSWuduf6NMIC8t30t7vyZ1iCCQnG3q85P1bFhMdBzhcBGfFumm/4RhFB873384JuhzN7zdqE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772825711; c=relaxed/simple; bh=em+r8m4f+3Sy5ULn1/QeoqXkIZf/n01lCAwTN8Rcyxg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ulup03qtC/MFN3snxS8/QxuM482wEo754kPpObE2r03rkF9tSHmfetG67x8Npn0eKeiQreQjaxnWaJEYSzpNepu0QNMqdb8YL4OEFWnz+lub1VlpYzPyw2KzJmRRMZbWjw6r53YONUxHxLGuxQPp4koKLAStByGUR6imS/YvgQg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3658D497; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 11:35:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from arm.com (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F9B83F836; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 11:35:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2026 19:35:01 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" Cc: Harry Yoo , Qing Wang , syzbot+cae7809e9dc1459e4e63@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, chao@kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org, jannh@google.com, linkinjeon@kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, pfalcato@suse.de, sj1557.seo@samsung.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, vbabka@suse.cz, Hao Li Subject: Re: [syzbot] [mm?] [f2fs?] [exfat?] memory leak in __kfree_rcu_sheaf Message-ID: References: <698a26d3.050a0220.3b3015.007e.GAE@google.com> <20260302034102.3145719-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com> <20df8dd1-a32c-489d-8345-085d424a2f12@kernel.org> <925a916a-6dfb-48c0-985c-0bdfb96ebd26@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <925a916a-6dfb-48c0-985c-0bdfb96ebd26@kernel.org> On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 02:39:47PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > On 3/4/26 2:30 AM, Harry Yoo wrote: > > [+Cc adding Catalin for kmemleak bits] > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 09:39:48AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > >> On 3/2/26 04:41, Qing Wang wrote: > >>> #syz test > >>> > >>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c > >>> index cdc1e652ec52..387979b89120 100644 > >>> --- a/mm/slub.c > >>> +++ b/mm/slub.c > >>> @@ -6307,15 +6307,21 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj) > >>> goto fail; > >>> > >>> if (!local_trylock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock)) { > >>> - barn_put_empty_sheaf(barn, empty); > >>> + if (barn && data_race(barn->nr_empty) < MAX_EMPTY_SHEAVES) > >>> + barn_put_empty_sheaf(barn, empty); > >>> + else > >>> + free_empty_sheaf(s, empty); > >>> goto fail; > >>> } > >>> > >>> pcs = this_cpu_ptr(s->cpu_sheaves); > >>> > >>> - if (unlikely(pcs->rcu_free)) > >>> - barn_put_empty_sheaf(barn, empty); > >>> - else > >>> + if (unlikely(pcs->rcu_free)) { > >>> + if (barn && data_race(barn->nr_empty) < MAX_EMPTY_SHEAVES) > >>> + barn_put_empty_sheaf(barn, empty); > >>> + else > >>> + free_empty_sheaf(s, empty); > >>> + } else > >>> pcs->rcu_free = empty; > >>> } > >> > >> I don't think this would fix any leak, and syzbot agrees. It would limit the > >> empty sheaves in barn more strictly, but they are not leaked. > >> Hm I don't see any leak in __kfree_rcu_sheaf() or rcu_free_sheaf(). Wonder > >> if kmemleak lacks visibility into barns or pcs's as roots for searching what > >> objects are considered referenced, or something? > > > > Objects that are allocated from slab and percpu allocator should be > > properly tracked by kmemleak. But those allocated with > > gfpflags_allow_spinning() == false are not tracked by kmemleak. > > > > When barns and sheaves are allocated early (!gfpflags_allow_spinning() > > due to gfp_allowed_mask) and it skips kmemleak_alloc_recursive(), > > it could produce false positives because from kmemleak's point of view, > > the objects are not reachable from the root set (data section, stack, > > etc.). > > Good point. > > > To me it seems kmemleak should gain allow_spin == false support > > sooner or later. > > Or we figure out how to deal with the false allow_spin == false during > boot. Here I'm a bit confused how exactly it happens because AFAICS in > slub we apply gfp_allowed_mask only when allocating a new slab, and in > slab_post_alloc_hook() we apply it to init_mask. That is indeed passed > to kmemleak_alloc_recursive() but not used for the > gfpflags_allow_spinning() decision. kmemleak_alloc_recursive() should > succeed because nobody should be holding any locks that would require > spinning. I don't fully understand what goes on. If kmemleak_alloc_recursive() failed to allocate for some reason (other than SLAB_NOLEAKTRACE), it would loudly disable kmemleak altogether and stop reporting leaks. Also kmemleak doesn't care about allow_spin, it's only the slub code which avoids calling kmemleak if spinning not allowed (as it takes some locks, may call back into the slab allocator). I wonder whether some early kmem_cache_node allocations like the ones in early_kmem_cache_node_alloc() are not tracked and then kmemleak cannot find n->barn. I got lost in the slub code, but something like this: -----------8<----------------------------------- diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c index 0c906fefc31b..401557ff5487 100644 --- a/mm/slub.c +++ b/mm/slub.c @@ -7513,6 +7513,7 @@ static void early_kmem_cache_node_alloc(int node) slab->freelist = get_freepointer(kmem_cache_node, n); slab->inuse = 1; kmem_cache_node->node[node] = n; + kmemleak_alloc(n, sizeof(*n), 1, GFP_NOWAIT); init_kmem_cache_node(n, NULL); inc_slabs_node(kmem_cache_node, node, slab->objects); -------------8<---------------------------------------- Another thing I noticed, not sure it's related but we should probably ignore an object once it has been passed to kvfree_call_rcu(), similar to what we do on the main path in this function. Also see commit 5f98fd034ca6 ("rcu: kmemleak: Ignore kmemleak false positives when RCU-freeing objects") when we added this kmemleak_ignore(). ---------8<----------------------------------- diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c index d5a70a831a2a..73f4668d870d 100644 --- a/mm/slab_common.c +++ b/mm/slab_common.c @@ -1954,8 +1954,14 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void *ptr) if (!head) might_sleep(); - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr)) + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr)) { + /* + * The object is now queued for deferred freeing via an RCU + * sheaf. Tell kmemleak to ignore it. + */ + kmemleak_ignore(ptr); return; + } // Queue the object but don't yet schedule the batch. if (debug_rcu_head_queue(ptr)) { ----------------8<----------------------------------- -- Catalin