Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/migrate: Fix read-only page got writable when recover pte

Ives van Hoorne
2022-11-10T21:53:29Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3221 bytes --]

I verified these latest changes with my initial test case, and can confirm
that I haven't been able to reproduce the problem anymore! Usually, I would
be able to reproduce the error after ~1-5 runs, given that I would fill the
page cache before the run, now I have been running the same test case for
50+ times, and I haven't seen the error anymore.

Thanks again Peter for taking the time to find the issue and coming up with
a fix!

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 21:31:31, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:

> Ives van Hoorne from codesandbox.io reported an issue regarding possible
> data loss of uffd-wp when applied to memfds on heavily loaded systems. The
> sympton is some read page got data mismatch from the snapshot child VMs.
>
> Here I can also reproduce with a Rust reproducer that was provided by Ives
> that keeps taking snapshot of a 256MB VM, on a 32G system when I initiate
> 80 instances I can trigger the issues in ten minutes.
>
> It turns out that we got some pages write-through even if uffd-wp is
> applied to the pte.
>
> The problem is, when removing migration entries, we didn't really worry
> about write bit as long as we know it's not a write migration entry. That
> may not be true, for some memory types (e.g. writable shmem) mk_pte can
> return a pte with write bit set, then to recover the migration entry to its
> original state we need to explicit wr-protect the pte or it'll has the
> write bit set if it's a read migration entry.
>
> For uffd it can cause write-through. I didn't verify, but I think it'll be
> the same for mprotect()ed pages and after migration we can miss the sigbus
> instead.
>
> The relevant code on uffd was introduced in the anon support, which is
> commit f45ec5ff16a7 ("userfaultfd: wp: support swap and page migration",
> 2020-04-07). However anon shouldn't suffer from this problem because anon
> should already have the write bit cleared always, so that may not be a
> proper Fixes target. To satisfy the need on the backport, I'm attaching the
> Fixes tag to the uffd-wp shmem support. Since no one had issue with
> mprotect, so I assume that's also the kernel version we should start to
> backport for stable, and we shouldn't need to worry before that.
>
> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Fixes: b1f9e876862d ("mm/uffd: enable write protection for shmem &
> hugetlbfs") Reported-by: Ives van Hoorne <ives@codesandbox.io>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/migrate.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> index dff333593a8a..8b6351c08c78 100644
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -213,8 +213,14 @@ static bool remove_migration_pte(struct folio *folio,
> pte = pte_mkdirty(pte);
> if (is_writable_migration_entry(entry))
> pte = maybe_mkwrite(pte, vma);
> - else if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(*pvmw.pte))
> + else
> + /* NOTE: mk_pte can have write bit set */
> + pte = pte_wrprotect(pte);
> +
> + if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(*pvmw.pte)) {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(pte_write(pte));
> pte = pte_mkuffd_wp(pte);
> + }
>
> if (folio_test_anon(folio) && !is_readable_migration_entry(entry))
> rmap_flags |= RMAP_EXCLUSIVE;
> --
> 2.37.3
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4918 bytes --]