From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: xu.xin@linux.dev
Cc: acme@kernel.org, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
apopple@nvidia.com, baohua@kernel.org,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
byungchul@sk.com, chengming.zhou@linux.dev, david@kernel.org,
dev.jain@arm.com, gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
gourry@gourry.net, harry@kernel.org,
"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
irogers@google.com, james.clark@linaro.org, jannh@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com, kas@kernel.org,
lance.yang@linux.dev, liam@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
matthew.brost@intel.com, mhiramat@kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com,
mingo@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, nico.pache@linux.dev,
oleg@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, riel@surriel.com,
rppt@kernel.org, ryan.roberts@arm.com, surenb@google.com,
svens@linux.ibm.com, usama.arif@linux.dev, vbabka@kernel.org,
ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
xialonglong2025@163.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/ksm: make break_ksm() more scalable
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2026 13:31:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-195354@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261102132956.302480-1-xu.xin@linux.dev>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] mm/ksm: redundant ksm_walk_lock enum and helper in break_ksm()
- [Low] mm/ksm: non-const stack mm_walk_ops in break_ksm() contradicts commit log
--
commit 05d53e6a6817e77860f887304a4f4cd4936f2c61
Author: Xu Xin <xu.xin@linux.dev>
mm/ksm: make break_ksm() more scalable
This commit replaces the boolean lock_vma parameter of break_ksm() with a
KSM-local enum ksm_walk_lock and constructs struct mm_walk_ops on the stack
instead of selecting between two static const tables.
> diff --git a/mm/ksm.c b/mm/ksm.c
> index d4fc0b0965aa1..84d363dabdc8a 100644
> --- a/mm/ksm.c
> +++ b/mm/ksm.c
> @@ -661,15 +661,25 @@ static int break_ksm_pmd_entry(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr, unsigned long en
> return found;
> }
>
> -static const struct mm_walk_ops break_ksm_ops = {
> - .pmd_entry = break_ksm_pmd_entry,
> - .walk_lock = PGWALK_RDLOCK,
> +/*
> + * Locking contexts in which break_ksm() may walk the page tables.
> + */
> +enum ksm_walk_lock {
> + /* walk under mmap_read_lock() */
> + KSM_WALK_MMAP_RDLOCK,
> + /* walk under mmap_write_lock() */
> + KSM_WALK_MMAP_WRLOCK,
> };
>
> -static const struct mm_walk_ops break_ksm_lock_vma_ops = {
> - .pmd_entry = break_ksm_pmd_entry,
> - .walk_lock = PGWALK_WRLOCK,
> -};
> +static enum page_walk_lock ksm_walk_lock_to_pgwalk(enum ksm_walk_lock lock)
> +{
> + switch (lock) {
> + case KSM_WALK_MMAP_WRLOCK:
> + return PGWALK_WRLOCK;
> + default:
> + return PGWALK_RDLOCK;
> + }
> +}
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but is enum ksm_walk_lock and ksm_walk_lock_to_pgwalk()
needed here?
include/linux/pagewalk.h is already included in mm/ksm.c and defines enum
page_walk_lock (PGWALK_RDLOCK, PGWALK_WRLOCK, PGWALK_VMA_RDLOCK_VERIFY),
which is already used directly elsewhere in mm/ksm.c. Since break_ksm() only
uses walk_lock to populate ops.walk_lock, could break_ksm() take enum
page_walk_lock directly instead of introducing a 1:1 wrapper enum and
conversion helper?
Also, the comment on KSM_WALK_MMAP_WRLOCK says "walk under mmap_write_lock()",
whereas mapping it to PGWALK_WRLOCK causes process_vma_walk_lock() to acquire
the VMA write lock via vma_start_write(vma) rather than only asserting that
mmap_write_lock() is held.
> /*
> * Though it's very tempting to unmerge rmap_items from stable tree rather
> @@ -697,17 +707,19 @@ static const struct mm_walk_ops break_ksm_lock_vma_ops = {
> * protection keys here anyway.
> */
> static int break_ksm(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> - unsigned long end, bool lock_vma)
> + unsigned long end, enum ksm_walk_lock walk_lock)
> {
> vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> - const struct mm_walk_ops *ops = lock_vma ?
> - &break_ksm_lock_vma_ops : &break_ksm_ops;
> + struct mm_walk_ops ops = {
> + .pmd_entry = break_ksm_pmd_entry,
> + .walk_lock = ksm_walk_lock_to_pgwalk(walk_lock),
> + };
[Severity: Low]
The commit message states:
break_ksm() currently takes a boolean 'lock_vma' to select between two
static mm_walk_ops tables. This is fragile: the ops struct is full of
function pointers and making it mutable (to switch walk_lock at runtime)
turns it into a juicy target for attackers.
Replace the boolean with a KSM-local enum ksm_walk_lock and build the
mm_walk_ops on the stack, so the table stays const and there is no
shared mutable state.
Previously, break_ksm_ops and break_ksm_lock_vma_ops were declared as static
const struct mm_walk_ops in .rodata, whereas this change declares struct
mm_walk_ops ops on the writable stack without const and reinitializes it on
every break_ksm() call.
Does moving the function pointer table from static const storage in .rodata
onto the stack without const match the security rationale in the commit
message, or should break_ksm() either keep selecting between static const
struct mm_walk_ops tables (as done in fs/proc/task_mmu.c) or at least mark
the stack struct const?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261102132416.300084-1-xu.xin@linux.dev?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-02 13:24 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/ksm: use per-VMA locking to reduce mmap_lock contention xu.xin
2026-11-02 13:28 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/pagewalk: delete the unused member xu.xin
2026-11-03 13:31 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: make folio_walk_start()'s locking asserts scalable xu.xin
2026-11-03 13:31 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/ksm: make break_ksm() more scalable xu.xin
2026-11-03 13:31 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-02 13:31 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] ksm: add find_mergeable_vma_locked() to use per-VMA locking xu.xin
2026-11-03 13:31 ` sashiko-bot
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=sashiko-outbox-195354@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=byungchul@sk.com \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=nico.pache@linux.dev \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=xialonglong2025@163.com \
--cc=xu.xin@linux.dev \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
--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