From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm/mremap: fix hugetlb reservation leak on partial move
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2026 13:13:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <auiJW4jzNs76F90O@gremlin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261030-b4-mremap-pre-split-v1-1-c1829811aed0@toxicpanda.com>
On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 02:42:46PM +0000, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Moving a part of a private hugetlb mapping with mremap() leaks the huge
> page reservations of the parts that stay. They are not returned when the
> mapping is unmapped, when the process exits or when the pool is resized.
>
> fixup_hugetlb_reservations() takes the reservation map away from the old
> VMA while that VMA still spans its whole range, because the moved part is
> only split off by the unmap at the end of the move. hugetlb_vm_op_close()
> then finds no map in the parts that remain and returns nothing for them:
>
> mmap() of 4 pages, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_HUGETLB HugePages_Rsvd: 4
> mremap() of the second page to a new address HugePages_Rsvd: 4
> munmap() of all of it HugePages_Rsvd: 3
>
> The source is unmapped in this case, so the number of VMAs ends up where it
> did before and the check against sysctl_max_map_count stays as it is.
>
> Fix by splitting a hugetlb VMA in prep_move_vma() before a part of it is
> moved, as commit 597e4b9ab48a ("mm/mremap: fix locked_vm leak by splitting
> VMA for MREMAP_DONTUNMAP") does for an mlock()'d VMA. A backport needs that
> commit, which is tagged for stable itself.
Ack, that one goes back to 5.7 in theory, this one 5.16 so all good.
>
> Fixes: 550a7d60bd5e ("mm, hugepages: add mremap() support for hugepage backed vma")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Some nits below but LGTM, so:
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <ljs@kernel.org>
> ---
> mm/mremap.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
> index 0d06d7f37f19..cf746bafdee4 100644
> --- a/mm/mremap.c
> +++ b/mm/mremap.c
> @@ -1038,7 +1038,7 @@ static void vrm_stat_account(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm,
> }
>
> static bool __check_map_count_against_split(struct mm_struct *mm,
> - bool pre_split,
> + bool source_stays,
> bool before_unmaps)
> {
> const int sys_map_count = get_sysctl_max_map_count();
> @@ -1092,14 +1092,15 @@ static bool __check_map_count_against_split(struct mm_struct *mm,
> */
> map_count += 2;
>
> - /* If pre-split, the -1 observed above doesn't apply. */
> - if (pre_split)
> + /* If the split off source stays, the -1 observed above doesn't apply. */
> + if (source_stays)
> map_count++;
>
> return map_count <= sys_map_count;
> }
>
> -static bool needs_pre_split(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> +/* Is the source range split off its VMA, to then stay mapped? */
NIT, but slightly awkward wording. Honestly I think we can just do without a
comment here, the name self-documents, and the hugetlb 'stuff' is documented in
the comment below.
> +static bool split_source_stays(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> {
> /*
> * An MREMAP_DONTUNMAP of a mlock()'d VMA needs to unlock the
> @@ -1109,11 +1110,23 @@ static bool needs_pre_split(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> vma_test(vrm->vma, VMA_LOCKED_BIT);
> }
>
> +static bool needs_pre_split(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> +{
> + /*
> + * fixup_hugetlb_reservations() takes the reservations away from the
> + * source VMA. The parts of it that do not move have to keep theirs.
> + */
If only we could swear in comments... :)
> + if (vma_is_hugetlb(vrm->vma))
> + return true;
> +
> + return split_source_stays(vrm);
> +}
> +
> /* Do we violate the map count limit if we split VMAs when moving the VMA? */
> static bool check_map_count_against_split(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> {
> return __check_map_count_against_split(current->mm,
> - needs_pre_split(vrm), /*before_unmaps=*/false);
> + split_source_stays(vrm), /*before_unmaps=*/false);
> }
>
> /* Do we violate the map count limit if we split VMAs prior to early unmaps? */
> @@ -1162,10 +1175,7 @@ static unsigned long prep_move_vma(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> - /*
> - * To account mlock()'d pages correctly in the MREMAP_DONTUNMAP
> - * case perform any split ahead of time for an mlock()'d VMA.
> - */
> + /* Perform any split ahead of time if the source VMA has to be distinct. */
Nice reduction in comment size too :)
> if (needs_pre_split(vrm)) {
> VMA_ITERATOR(vmi, vma->vm_mm, old_addr);
>
>
> --
> 2.55.0
>
--
Cheers, Lorenzo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-02 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-30 14:42 [PATCH 0/6] mm/mremap: report a failed split before moving anything Josef Bacik
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm/mremap: fix hugetlb reservation leak on partial move Josef Bacik
2026-11-02 13:13 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) [this message]
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 2/6] selftests/mm: test a partial mremap() of hugetlb memory Josef Bacik
2026-11-02 13:14 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm/mremap: reaccount on unmap failure only if accounted Josef Bacik
2026-11-02 13:17 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm/mremap: restore VM_ACCOUNT if the unmap fails Josef Bacik
2026-11-02 13:38 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 5/6] selftests/mm: test mremap() with an old size of 0 Josef Bacik
2026-11-02 13:39 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-10-30 14:42 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm/mremap: split first so a failed split is reported Josef Bacik
2026-10-31 19:27 ` Jose A. Perez de Azpillaga
2026-11-02 13:57 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-11-02 12:50 ` [PATCH 0/6] mm/mremap: report a failed split before moving anything Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
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=auiJW4jzNs76F90O@gremlin \
--to=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@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