From: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>, Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Li Youhong <liyouhong@kylinos.cn>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memory-failure: fix folio refcount leak and min_order_for_split() locking
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2026 10:55:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <923FAF8F-93B0-473D-8DC9-C48FA1EED190@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260806-try_to_split_thp_page-v1-1-a259e3387e38@kernel.org>
On 6 Aug 2026, at 7:14, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> hwpoison code can end up calling min_order_for_split() without holding
> the folio lock. There isn't really something that would prevent
> concurrent folio split. Consequently folio->mapping can get set to
> NULL after checking for "!folio->mapping", and if the compiler
> reloads folio->mapping, mapping_min_folio_order() would try to
> dereference NULL.
>
> While very unlikely to happen in practice, let's just enforce that
> min_order_for_split() is called with the folio lock held. We can
> significantly cleanup the calling hwpoison code, and just get rid
> of try_to_split_thp_page() to hold the folio lock for a bit longer.
>
> Just work on folios now, which further cleans up the code. We just
> have to be careful about doing the page_folio() after splitting, which
> we have to do already either way. Do not change the way we split for
> now, this needs more thought and should be done separately.
>
> Cleaning this up we fix another issue: in soft_offline_in_use_page(), we
> would currently have leaked a folio reference.
>
> In folio_split(), document and assert that we need the folio lock.
> Drop the questionable VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!page_count(p), p) check entirely.
>
> The folio->mapping problem was identified by Sashiko, and Li Youhong
> reported it by sending a proposal fix.
>
> This likely does not really warrant CCing stable, but I expect little
> conflicts when doing the backport, so let's just CC stable because of
> the refcount leak.
>
> Reported-by: Li Youhong <liyouhong@kylinos.cn>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260804035828.2684059-1-dayou5941@163.com
> Fixes: 689b8986776c ("mm/memory-failure: improve large block size folio handling")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>
> ---
> v4 of the last fixing attempts:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260806031958.677935-1-dayou5941@163.com
> ---
> mm/huge_memory.c | 4 ++++
> mm/memory-failure.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------------
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
Changes look good to me. Removing NOTE part from soft offline looks good
to me too. Thanks for cleaning it up.
Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-06 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-06 11:14 [PATCH] mm/memory-failure: fix folio refcount leak and min_order_for_split() locking David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-08-06 12:06 ` Usama Arif
2026-08-06 14:03 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-08-06 14:17 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-08-06 14:26 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-08-06 14:55 ` Zi Yan [this message]
2026-08-07 1:49 ` Baolin Wang
2026-08-07 9:28 ` Miaohe Lin
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=923FAF8F-93B0-473D-8DC9-C48FA1EED190@nvidia.com \
--to=ziy@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liyouhong@kylinos.cn \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
/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