From: Josh Law <hlcj1234567@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Law <objecting@objecting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] lib/idr: fix infinite loop in idr_get_next()
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 21:15:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c41dbb9d-b8a5-4b5f-9f71-3fe1bed210b6@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43bacae7-3891-417e-9384-20cede8eec6e@gmail.com>
12 Mar 2026 20:57:48 Josh Law <hlcj1234567@gmail.com>:
> 12 Mar 2026 20:55:15 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Mar 2026 18:19:47 +0000 Josh Law <hlcj1234567@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In idr_get_next(), if the returned id from idr_get_next_ul() is greater
>>> than INT_MAX, the function issues a warning and returns NULL without
>>> updating the *nextid pointer. This causes a soft lockup for any caller
>>> iterating over an IDR (e.g. via idr_for_each_entry) because they will
>>> receive NULL, fail to advance their index, and repeatedly query the same
>>> state forever.
>>
>> This assumes that the idr_get_next() caller ignores the NULL return and
>> just keeps on looping. Isn't that a caller bug and if so, do we need
>> to defend against it here?
>
> The risk isn't just a single loop failure; it's that idr_get_next() breaks the 'forward-progress' guarantee of the iterator.
> In macros like idr_for_each_entry_continue, if idr_get_next() returns NULL without advancing the pointer, the caller is left in a permanent trap. Any attempt to resume or retry the iteration results in an infinite loop of the same warning because the index is never incremented past the problematic ID.
> Advancing the pointer ensures the infrastructure is robust against these 'soft lockups', even if the caller's error handling is imperfect..
This most definitely needs to be merged.
V/R
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-12 21:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-12 18:19 [PATCH v3 0/2] lib/idr: Fixes for infinite loop and memory leak Josh Law
2026-03-12 18:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] lib/idr: fix infinite loop in idr_get_next() Josh Law
2026-03-12 20:55 ` Andrew Morton
2026-03-12 20:57 ` Josh Law
2026-03-12 21:15 ` Josh Law [this message]
2026-03-12 18:19 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] lib/idr: fix memory leak in ida_alloc_range() error path Josh Law
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=c41dbb9d-b8a5-4b5f-9f71-3fe1bed210b6@gmail.com \
--to=hlcj1234567@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=objecting@objecting.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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