From: Kiryl Shutsemau <kirill@shutemov.name>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>,
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>,
Hao Zhang <zhanghao1@kylinos.cn>,
Hao Zhang <hao_zhang_kdev@163.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] mm/memory-failure: keep the folio, not the poisoned subpage, locked across split
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 11:42:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aldjhtfVByHDQXe6@thinkstation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DJYH202OLKZF.432DAJWF2MGA@nvidia.com>
On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 01:31:54PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On Tue Jul 14, 2026 at 12:40 PM EDT, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 11:44:39AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> >> There is an alternative, only igrab() when @lock_at is at or beyond the EOF,
> >> as I was bouncing ideas with Codex.
> >
> > I saw this option too, but I wound rather not go this path.
> >
> > iput() still can lead to inode eviction an bunch of random filesystem
> > complexity under us. I don't think we want to think about other
> > fs-related locking issues in split context.
>
> Your reasoning makes sense to me. Let's ignore this option.
>
> For your patch 2, we might want something like below to avoid over
> rejecting splits. WDYT?
>
> offset = folio_page_idx(folio, lock_at);
>
> if (split_type == SPLIT_TYPE_UNIFORM)
> lock_at_index = folio->index + round_down(offset, 1UL << new_order);
> else
> /* @lock_at in non uniform split is always @folio */
> lock_at_index = folio->index;
>
> if (lock_at_index >= end) {
> ret = -EBUSY;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
>
Right. With the -EBUSY condition growing this hairy -- and having to stay
correct for non-uniform splits too -- just moving i_mmap_unlock_read() out
of the window looks more attractive.
This is really Hao's original patch with the reasoning corrected, so I kept
him as author. v3 below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta)" <kas@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3] mm/huge_memory: unlock i_mmap_rwsem before releasing
after-split folios
__folio_split() keeps dereferencing the mapping after the split:
shmem_uncharge(mapping->host) and remap_page() while the folios are still
frozen/locked, and i_mmap_unlock_read(mapping) at the very end, after the
after-split folios have been unlocked and freed.
Nothing holds an inode reference across that. The split relies on @folio
-- which the beyond-EOF drop loop never removes, as it starts at
folio_next(folio) -- staying locked and in the page cache to hold off
eviction. But the unlock loop unlocks @folio before i_mmap_unlock_read()
runs. If the caller's @lock_at is a tail beyond EOF, as memory_failure()
passes when splitting a poisoned tail of a shmem THP that reaches past
i_size during truncation, it too is gone from the page cache; so once
@folio is unlocked no locked, in-cache folio pins the inode, and a
concurrent final iput() can evict and RCU-free it before
i_mmap_unlock_read() touches i_mmap_rwsem:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __up_read+0x634/0x790
i_mmap_unlock_read include/linux/fs.h:537 [inline]
__folio_split+0x732/0x1640 mm/huge_memory.c:4100
try_to_split_thp_page+0xab/0x390 mm/memory-failure.c:1675
memory_failure+0x1394/0x26e0 mm/memory-failure.c:2470
Freed by task 4601:
shmem_free_in_core_inode+0x54/0xb0 mm/shmem.c:5177
evict+0x57f/0xac0 fs/inode.c:870
Do every mapping dereference while @folio still pins the inode: drop
i_mmap_rwsem right after remap_page(), before the loop that unlocks and
frees the after-split folios, and clear @mapping so the exit path does not
unlock it again. shmem_uncharge() and remap_page() already run before that
point, so after this nothing past the unlock loop touches the inode or the
mapping.
This is now a rule the split depends on, alongside keeping @folio frozen
until the page cache is updated: no inode or mapping dereference once the
after-split folios start being unlocked.
Reported-by: Hao Zhang <zhanghao1@kylinos.cn>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260710071344.GA106129@zh-pc
Fixes: baa355fd3314 ("thp: file pages support for split_huge_page()")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Co-developed-by: Hao Zhang <zhanghao1@kylinos.cn>
Signed-off-by: Hao Zhang <zhanghao1@kylinos.cn>
Signed-off-by: Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta) <kas@kernel.org>
---
mm/huge_memory.c | 12 ++++++++++++
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 2bccb0a53a0a..abaea34ef558 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -4109,6 +4109,18 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
remap_page(folio, 1 << old_order, ttu_flags);
+ /*
+ * Drop the mapping while the inode is still pinned. @folio stays
+ * locked and present in the page cache until the loop below, so
+ * eviction cannot free the inode yet; @lock_at is not enough, it may
+ * be a tail beyond EOF that the split already dropped from the page
+ * cache. Nothing past this point may touch the inode or the mapping.
+ */
+ if (mapping) {
+ i_mmap_unlock_read(mapping);
+ mapping = NULL;
+ }
+
/*
* Unlock all after-split folios except the one containing
* @lock_at page. If @folio is not split, it will be kept locked.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-15 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-14 12:23 [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: fix inode UAF when splitting a file folio past EOF Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 12:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm/memory-failure: keep the folio, not the poisoned subpage, locked across split Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 13:01 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-14 14:53 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-14 15:44 ` Zi Yan
2026-07-14 16:40 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 17:31 ` Zi Yan
2026-07-15 10:42 ` Kiryl Shutsemau [this message]
2026-07-15 13:01 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-15 13:27 ` Zi Yan
2026-07-14 13:05 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 12:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm/huge_memory: refuse to split a file folio when the anchor is beyond EOF Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 12:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm/huge_memory: remove unused split_huge_page_to_order() Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 12:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm/huge_memory: remove unused can_split_folio() Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-14 12:23 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm/huge_memory: fold split_folio_to_list_to_order() into split_folio_to_order() Kiryl Shutsemau
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=aldjhtfVByHDQXe6@thinkstation \
--to=kirill@shutemov.name \
--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=hao_zhang_kdev@163.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=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=zhanghao1@kylinos.cn \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/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