From: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
To: Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: arena: allocate the fault-in page outside the lock
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 14:43:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <354f214b-bd81-49b6-9642-ddfbaa936694@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DK9T753AD314.1K18DTGBR7OYN@etsalapatis.com>
On 7/28/26 9:22 AM, Emil Tsalapatis wrote:
> On Mon Jul 27, 2026 at 2:24 AM EDT, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
>> arena_vm_fault() allocated the page while holding arena->spinlock, so it
>> could only use the non-blocking allocator. Once the memcg is at
>> memory.max that allocation just fails, the fault turns into
>> VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV, and the process gets a SIGSEGV on a perfectly valid
>> arena address. Hitting memory.max is routine (e.g. page cache from
>> reading a big file), so this kills innocent processes.
>>
>> Preallocate the page before taking the lock, like do_anonymous_page()
>> does, so the allocation can sleep and go through reclaim and the OOM
>> path, and return VM_FAULT_OOM on failure so the memcg OOM handler runs
>> instead of a fake segfault. Also tidy up the error labels.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
>> ---
>> kernel/bpf/arena.c | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/arena.c b/kernel/bpf/arena.c
>> index 34f023a537fe..22a41e3c53b8 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/arena.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/arena.c
>> @@ -481,7 +481,8 @@ static vm_fault_t arena_vm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> struct bpf_map *map = vmf->vma->vm_file->private_data;
>> struct bpf_arena *arena = container_of(map, struct bpf_arena, map);
>> struct mem_cgroup *new_memcg, *old_memcg;
>> - struct page *page;
>> + struct page *page, *new_page = NULL;
>> + vm_fault_t fault_ret;
>> long kbase, kaddr;
>> unsigned long flags;
>> int ret;
>> @@ -489,55 +490,97 @@ static vm_fault_t arena_vm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> kbase = bpf_arena_get_kern_vm_start(arena);
>> kaddr = kbase + (u32)(vmf->address);
>>
>> - if (raw_res_spin_lock_irqsave(&arena->spinlock, flags))
>> + page = vmalloc_to_page((void *)kaddr);
>> + if (!page) {
>> + /*
>> + * Preallocate outside the lock so the allocation can sleep and go
>> + * through reclaim (both memcg and global), the way do_anonymous_page()
>> + * does. Under arena->spinlock only the non-blocking allocator is
>> + * available, which never reclaims.
>> + *
> Can you add here that we're in process context which is why we make an
> explicitly sleepable call? That also strengthens the explanation of why
> we want to preallocate in the first place.
>
>> + * This has to be the sleepable variant: VM_FAULT_OOM below is only
>> + * meaningful if the OOM machinery was actually engaged. A failure
>> + * from the non-blocking allocator engages nothing, so the fault
>> + * would be retried forever.
>> + */
>> + bpf_map_memcg_enter(&arena->map, &old_memcg, &new_memcg);
>> + new_page = bpf_map_alloc_page_sleepable(map, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>> + bpf_map_memcg_exit(old_memcg, new_memcg);
>> + if (!new_page)
>> + return VM_FAULT_OOM;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (raw_res_spin_lock_irqsave(&arena->spinlock, flags)) {
>> /* Make a reasonable effort to address impossible case */
>> - return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + goto out_err;
>> + }
>>
>> page = vmalloc_to_page((void *)kaddr);
>> if (page) {
>> - if (page == arena->scratch_page)
>> + if (page == arena->scratch_page) {
>> /* BPF triggered scratch here; don't lazy-alloc over it */
>> - goto out_sigsegv;
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV;
>> + goto out_err_locked;
>> + }
>> /* already have a page vmap-ed */
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> + /*
>> + * The lockless probe was racy: it saw a page, so nothing was
>> + * preallocated, but the re-check under the lock finds it gone - a
>> + * concurrent free must have run in between. There is nothing to
>> + * install and we cannot allocate under the lock, so retry the fault
>> + * and preallocate next time.
>> + */
>> + if (!new_page) {
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>> + goto out_err_locked;
>> + }
>> +
>> bpf_map_memcg_enter(&arena->map, &old_memcg, &new_memcg);
>>
>> - if (arena->map.map_flags & BPF_F_SEGV_ON_FAULT)
>> + if (arena->map.map_flags & BPF_F_SEGV_ON_FAULT) {
>> /* User space requested to segfault when page is not allocated by bpf prog */
>> - goto out_sigsegv_memcg;
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV;
>> + goto out_err_locked_memcg;
>> + }
> Let's hoist this further up, I don't see why we're waiting to get so
> much into handling the fault before checking if we're even allowed to
> do it in the first place.
>
>>
>> ret = range_tree_clear(&arena->rt, vmf->pgoff, 1);
>> - if (ret)
>> - goto out_sigsegv_memcg;
>> -
>> - struct apply_range_data data = { .arena = arena, .pages = &page, .i = 0 };
>> - /* Account into memcg of the process that created bpf_arena */
>> - ret = bpf_map_alloc_pages(map, NUMA_NO_NODE, 1, &page);
>> if (ret) {
>> - range_tree_set(&arena->rt, vmf->pgoff, 1);
>> - goto out_sigsegv_memcg;
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
> Can you add a comment that VM_FAULT_OOM is because the only way clearing
> the tree can fail is if there is a failed range allocation?
>
>> + goto out_err_locked_memcg;
>> }
>> + struct apply_range_data data = { .arena = arena, .pages = &new_page, .i = 0 };
>>
>> ret = apply_to_page_range(&init_mm, kaddr, PAGE_SIZE, apply_range_set_cb, &data);
>> if (ret) {
>> range_tree_set(&arena->rt, vmf->pgoff, 1);
>> - free_pages_nolock(page, 0);
>> - goto out_sigsegv_memcg;
>> + fault_ret = VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV;
>> + goto out_err_locked_memcg;
>> }
>> flush_vmap_cache(kaddr, PAGE_SIZE);
>> bpf_map_memcg_exit(old_memcg, new_memcg);
>> + /* new_page was consumed */
>> + page = new_page;
>> + new_page = NULL;
>> out:
>> page_ref_add(page, 1);
>> raw_res_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&arena->spinlock, flags);
>> + if (new_page)
>> + free_pages_nolock(new_page, 0);
>> vmf->page = page;
>> return 0;
>> -out_sigsegv_memcg:
>> +
>> +out_err_locked_memcg:
>> bpf_map_memcg_exit(old_memcg, new_memcg);
>> -out_sigsegv:
>> +out_err_locked:
>> raw_res_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&arena->spinlock, flags);
>> - return VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV;
>> +out_err:
>> + if (new_page)
>> + free_pages_nolock(new_page, 0);
>> + return fault_ret;
> The out_err label is used only once. Can we replace the label with
> the code itself, even if this means some mild duplication? Four
> different labels are too many imo.
>
>> }
>>
>> static const struct vm_operations_struct arena_vm_ops = {
> pw-bot: cr
Sorry for the delay. I missed this mail earlier...
Everything makes sense.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 6:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-27 6:24 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf: arena: handle memory.max on fault-in with reclaim/OOM Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-27 6:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Add a sleepable page allocator for map memory Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-27 6:37 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-27 7:30 ` Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-28 0:48 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-07-27 6:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: arena: allocate the fault-in page outside the lock Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-27 6:42 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-27 8:00 ` Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-28 1:00 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-07-27 7:10 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-28 1:22 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-08-03 6:43 ` Jiayuan Chen [this message]
2026-07-27 6:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add a test for arena fault-in under memory.max Jiayuan Chen
2026-07-28 0:54 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-08-03 11:42 ` Jiayuan Chen
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=354f214b-bd81-49b6-9642-ddfbaa936694@linux.dev \
--to=jiayuan.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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