Linux-Next discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
	 Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the mm-hotfixes-unstable tree
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:33:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <amdA05gNFyzg4Uwc@lucifer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ambxL-NxiYZ3vmpu@kernel.org>

On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 08:48:31AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2026 at 10:33:53PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> >   7a7c16a2d2b4d ("x86/mm/pat: acquire init_mm read lock on attribute change to avoid UAF")
> >   25a54f65ccbaf ("x86/mm/pat: allocate split page tables as kernel page tables")
> >
> > from the mm-hotfixes-unstable tree and commit:
> >
> >   5fce67641a3ed ("x86/mm/pat: Don't gate cpa_lock on debug_pagealloc_enabled()")
> >
> > from the tip tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.
> >
> > diff --cc arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> > index 422ce7fba00c6,1f2a2ba9ce57d..0000000000000
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> > @@@ -440,30 -441,12 +443,32 @@@ static void __cpa_collapse_large_pages(
> >
> >   	list_for_each_entry_safe(ptdesc, tmp, &pgtables, pt_list) {
> >   		list_del(&ptdesc->pt_list);
> >  -		pagetable_free(ptdesc);
> >  +		/*
> >  +		 * Only early alloc'd direct map should not be flagged PG_table
> >  +		 * here and those shouldn't be collapsed. However be abundantly
> >  +		 * cautious and handle the !PG_table case too.
> >  +		 */
> >  +		if (PageTable((ptdesc_page(ptdesc))))
> >  +			pagetable_dtor_free(ptdesc);
> >  +		else
> >  +			pagetable_free(ptdesc);
> >   	}
> > +
> > + 	spin_unlock(&cpa_lock);
> >   }
> >
> >  +static void cpa_collapse_large_pages(struct cpa_data *cpa)
> >  +{
> >  +	/*
> >  +	 * Take the mmap write lock on init_mm to:
> >  +	 * - Avoid a use-after-free if raced by ptdump (which takes its own
> >  +	 *   write lock on init_mm).
> >  +	 * - Serialise concurrent CPA walkers.
> >  +	 */
> >  +	scoped_guard(mmap_write_lock, &init_mm)
> >  +		__cpa_collapse_large_pages(cpa);
> >  +}
> >  +
> >   static void cpa_flush(struct cpa_data *cpa, int cache)
> >   {
> >   	unsigned int i;
> > @@@ -1254,22 -1237,16 +1258,20 @@@ __split_large_page(struct cpa_data *cpa
> >   static int split_large_page(struct cpa_data *cpa, pte_t *kpte,
> >   			    unsigned long address)
> >   {
> >  -	struct ptdesc *ptdesc;
> >  +	pte_t *pte;
> >
> > - 	if (!debug_pagealloc_enabled())
> > - 		spin_unlock(&cpa_lock);
> > + 	spin_unlock(&cpa_lock);
>
> This should be
>
>  	if (!debug_pagealloc_enabled())
>  		spin_unlock(&cpa_lock);
>
> >  -	ptdesc = pagetable_alloc(GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> >  +	if (cpa->init_mm_read_locked)
> >  +		mmap_read_unlock(&init_mm);
> >  +	pte = pte_alloc_one_kernel(&init_mm);
> >  +	if (cpa->init_mm_read_locked)
> >  +		mmap_read_lock(&init_mm);
> > - 	if (!debug_pagealloc_enabled())
> > - 		spin_lock(&cpa_lock);
> > + 	spin_lock(&cpa_lock);
>
> And this
>
> 	if (!debug_pagealloc_enabled())
>  		spin_lock(&cpa_lock);
>
> >  -	if (!ptdesc)
> >  +	if (!pte)
> >   		return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >  -	if (__split_large_page(cpa, kpte, address, ptdesc))
> >  -		pagetable_free(ptdesc);
> >  +	if (__split_large_page(cpa, kpte, address, pte))
> >  +		pte_free_kernel(&init_mm, pte);
> >
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.

Hmm, what's the status of the x86/mm trees on this though? AFAICT Denis's
patch is still as-is and the spin_lock() vs. spin_[un]lock_irq*() issue
raised in [0] is unaddressed?

So is this fixup actually representative of what's going upstream?

Thanks, Lorenzo

[0]:https://lore.kernel.org/all/al-MrKyIafA8QR_8@lucifer/

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-27 11:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-26 21:33 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the mm-hotfixes-unstable tree Mark Brown
2026-07-27  5:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-27 11:33   ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) [this message]
2026-07-27 13:03     ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-27 18:15       ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-07-27 11:38   ` Mark Brown
2026-07-27 13:09     ` Mike Rapoport
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-07-21 13:46 Mark Brown
2026-07-21 16:14 ` 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=amdA05gNFyzg4Uwc@lucifer \
    --to=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@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