From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C39CE188CC9 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2025 18:21:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754072473; cv=none; b=JmMvLSXDD/DpG7XWyiGEMLjuG0wLdOLrL4HMoQGQra59tBmIf7jrfSlYrg3NfnXfj3oCjh4tXMwNJpTYdqkxKIO5E0hd7Spz1u1FXjc1yLg211EUeNUljixycICDifovGEAAJSHwnojcHgucspD/GWY9hMugAQ7YGW2S6wJwp10= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754072473; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZyhKLAXPVem8Lwhg/0x9FEtKYTT6fl9Yd/aQVwsfu4A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rIEHAtpWEQmqI8YAjyjEf8s9432o42z2xLKcZ1BBelMA/BBUvTcjLTu0FDuEW0YRW3agdmHvS0g4ut5bRGq8QKOoGfO2ylYFEccNE5hKAgGCrjFSf5xKBc+Si9JAtSDIQI0KSi0eCSFHjHaOVaKfGwRrYttPnwoJUPsax08eYNk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=gT2Lz8UJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gT2Lz8UJ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1754072468; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2g39l8sL+vMNhyKGrd5r0iuwpLk0Okh6OkF+13JKUXU=; b=gT2Lz8UJ0VEsicsGUlKIwsyVtMp7vipjsq98ODm34Ea5kf34w5ETZqmhG+vyNvW0V/n5YZ j10mLtzdO7TxsZ+01arRZUsZaiW2NWhUqzrdCOX2fFwys1kpaEKnzB8JH/duwiX0gQ5F2b XW3NH6uBtDnWDrRnGE6M7iPlaLm4pR4= Received: from mail-qv1-f70.google.com (mail-qv1-f70.google.com [209.85.219.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-297-m5xlWtWJMl2ZaqBw0ZcHow-1; Fri, 01 Aug 2025 14:21:07 -0400 X-MC-Unique: m5xlWtWJMl2ZaqBw0ZcHow-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: m5xlWtWJMl2ZaqBw0ZcHow_1754072465 Received: by mail-qv1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6fb5f71b363so24177726d6.2 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2025 11:21:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1754072465; x=1754677265; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2g39l8sL+vMNhyKGrd5r0iuwpLk0Okh6OkF+13JKUXU=; b=VR8eLQBc2nSUkGju1b04cgUoFRJDqPvHvWedvRj9vqr6or/9FhB+ZCu4EH3txVG8lR ozI8ldKfuvcodryZxrFyRA0KJX5aORG9BcX7yfM110CpvRH91Gr0RoNpkaF0srzVm+z0 sq2YhBEgLo8K+gEz7wfBOlGoYrvBobRYivn8PmsMX8+JGgxboz0LN1bW7BT3i1kn64bU eHZqrLK+SbaIuaWH+M5z/tx0Qo4e2YOvtp3lkp40EEXyKyzP4YxBKaQj05k8GIBJZMiE 77N1kw4iJ1MaYEfsV0ahZOvcnPEvQaQoofHQWrL6IoyoYkMVVwBftqZlxF8G8nYIs+GD k2JA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWnWCErF3P9WFYURvr+QXynAfN47tlAH6InUcEq7pONS3MMZrnUJCJ9GrkXgZEJaAtAQN+JAHHOamiZpq8=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywlf3OB86/tVGMXDnZP50mK/MdX9wvWcULtSLIWzBynz2RtbXF2 mGr3BUxI3ZdSVP/8Dwhqw/t2IxaR3vqPwaU9YQC4lNysnB4UDr5oIqr7qUxyRCliYAcpQLXIZqr waB74gLQUnIrj3Z0TY9FjphpyMXwgTY/UL/qIUayn59p2XZZoeCrM5mXn9s0XMrSI+A== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv/GxCpmefll5XcXnzoU2rN+SHu0JrdkXbkaeTEOC7duHhRu+pU+yUs7AgWeVx tfACQc2dLE7PB1lpIOqD7I0FtpVzPI5HsTJmXSLbiBvXIErJ7l3X0yU6RNb6y6bcfN4q/FHchFu BqFNkkuRHyUaPJjaV8G9+1cRxOo8SiC+bYR0qDbTzMrqfBX9G/YppI57T+51Sj2MMSlLKlQEcy3 Bqluv00LUZtzv1Q0fWk30YLu6GhYT2mXD8ehji+2xBBLh4b6GHu6ESyYaY7K76VJSONKK7Xap55 lEf8sl8KAUMuBQVHcbS4iymkTrjMHcnz X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5e88:0:b0:707:5ccb:6c4 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-7093633522bmr10005856d6.49.1754072465242; Fri, 01 Aug 2025 11:21:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFJHvaY504H4W8dqLVRQkrI3AZzsoZBUQlKebveXmIXu7VcAHN9hG/HeWlxIkI0yMFKMrPIQA== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5e88:0:b0:707:5ccb:6c4 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-7093633522bmr10005226d6.49.1754072464631; Fri, 01 Aug 2025 11:21:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x1.local ([174.89.135.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d75a77b69052e-4aeeed62d1fsm22935171cf.41.2025.08.01.11.21.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 01 Aug 2025 11:21:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 14:20:45 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: David Hildenbrand , akpm@linux-foundation.org, aarcange@redhat.com, lokeshgidra@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzbot+b446dbe27035ef6bd6c2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] userfaultfd: fix a crash when UFFDIO_MOVE handles a THP hole Message-ID: References: <20250731154442.319568-1-surenb@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 05:45:10PM +0000, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 5:13 PM Peter Xu wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 09:41:31AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 9:23 AM Peter Xu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 08:28:38AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 7:16 AM Peter Xu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2025 at 09:21:30AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > > > > On 31.07.25 17:44, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you mean in you patch description: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "userfaultfd: fix a crash in UFFDIO_MOVE with some non-present PMDs" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Talking about THP holes is very very confusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When UFFDIO_MOVE is used with UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_SRC_HOLES and it > > > > > > > > encounters a non-present THP, it fails to properly recognize an unmapped > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You mean a "non-present PMD that is not a migration entry". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hole and tries to access a non-existent folio, resulting in > > > > > > > > a crash. Add a check to skip non-present THPs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That makes sense. The code we have after this patch is rather complicated > > > > > > > and hard to read. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: adef440691ba ("userfaultfd: UFFDIO_MOVE uABI") > > > > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+b446dbe27035ef6bd6c2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > > > > > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/68794b5c.a70a0220.693ce.0050.GAE@google.com/ > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes since v1 [1] > > > > > > > > - Fixed step size calculation, per Lokesh Gidra > > > > > > > > - Added missing check for UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_SRC_HOLES, per Lokesh Gidra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250730170733.3829267-1-surenb@google.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mm/userfaultfd.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/userfaultfd.c b/mm/userfaultfd.c > > > > > > > > index cbed91b09640..b5af31c22731 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/mm/userfaultfd.c > > > > > > > > +++ b/mm/userfaultfd.c > > > > > > > > @@ -1818,28 +1818,41 @@ ssize_t move_pages(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, unsigned long dst_start, > > > > > > > > ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(src_pmd, src_vma); > > > > > > > > if (ptl) { > > > > > > > > - /* Check if we can move the pmd without splitting it. */ > > > > > > > > - if (move_splits_huge_pmd(dst_addr, src_addr, src_start + len) || > > > > > > > > - !pmd_none(dst_pmdval)) { > > > > > > > > - struct folio *folio = pmd_folio(*src_pmd); > > > > > > > > + if (pmd_present(*src_pmd) || is_pmd_migration_entry(*src_pmd)) { > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* Check if we can move the pmd without splitting it. */ > > > > > > > > + if (move_splits_huge_pmd(dst_addr, src_addr, src_start + len) || > > > > > > > > + !pmd_none(dst_pmdval)) { > > > > > > > > + if (pmd_present(*src_pmd)) { > > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > > > > + struct folio *folio = pmd_folio(*src_pmd); > > > > > > > > [3] > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > + if (!folio || (!is_huge_zero_folio(folio) && > > > > > > > > + !PageAnonExclusive(&folio->page))) { > > > > > > > > + spin_unlock(ptl); > > > > > > > > + err = -EBUSY; > > > > > > > > + break; > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... in particular that. Is there some way to make this code simpler / easier > > > > > > > to read? Like moving that whole last folio-check thingy into a helper? > > > > > > > > > > > > One question might be relevant is, whether the check above [1] can be > > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > > > The thing is __pmd_trans_huge_lock() does double check the pmd to be !none > > > > > > before returning the ptl. I didn't follow closely on the recent changes on > > > > > > mm side on possible new pmd swap entries, if migration is the only possible > > > > > > one then it looks like [1] can be avoided. > > > > > > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > is_swap_pmd() check in __pmd_trans_huge_lock() allows for (!pmd_none() > > > > > && !pmd_present()) PMD to pass and that's when this crash is hit. > > > > > > > > First for all, thanks for looking into the issue with Lokesh; I am still > > > > catching up with emails after taking weeks off. > > > > > > > > I didn't yet read into the syzbot report, but I thought the bug was about > > > > referencing the folio on top of a swap entry after reading your current > > > > patch, which has: > > > > > > > > if (move_splits_huge_pmd(dst_addr, src_addr, src_start + len) || > > > > !pmd_none(dst_pmdval)) { > > > > struct folio *folio = pmd_folio(*src_pmd); <---- > > > > > > > > Here looks like *src_pmd can be a migration entry. Is my understanding > > > > correct? > > > > > > Correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > If we drop the check at [1] then the path that takes us to > > > > > > > > If my above understanding is correct, IMHO it should be [2] above that > > > > makes sure the reference won't happen on a swap entry, not necessarily [1]? > > > > > > Yes, in case of migration entry this is what protects us. > > > > > > > > > > > > split_huge_pmd() will bail out inside split_huge_pmd_locked() with no > > > > > indication that split did not happen. Afterwards we will retry > > > > > > > > So we're talking about the case where it's a swap pmd entry, right? > > > > > > Hmm, my understanding is that it's being treated as a swap entry but > > > in reality is not. I thought THPs are always split before they get > > > swapped, no? > > > > Yes they should be split, afaiu. > > > > > > > > > Could you elaborate why the split would fail? > > > > > > Just looking at the code, split_huge_pmd_locked() checks for > > > (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) || is_pmd_migration_entry(*pmd)). > > > pmd_trans_huge() is false if !pmd_present() and it's not a migration > > > entry, so __split_huge_pmd_locked() will be skipped. > > > > Here might be the major part of where confusion came from: I thought it > > must be a migration pmd entry to hit the issue, so it's not? > > > > I checked the code just now: > > > > __handle_mm_fault: > > if (unlikely(is_swap_pmd(vmf.orig_pmd))) { > > VM_BUG_ON(thp_migration_supported() && > > !is_pmd_migration_entry(vmf.orig_pmd)); > > > > So IIUC pmd migration entry is still the only possible way to have a swap > > entry. It doesn't look like we have "real" swap entries for PMD (which can > > further points to some swapfiles)? > > Correct. AFAIU here we stumble on a pmd entry which was allocated but > never populated. Do you mean a pmd_none()? If so, that goes back to my original question, on why __pmd_trans_huge_lock() returns non-NULL if it's a pmd_none()? IMHO it really should have returned NULL for pmd_none(). IOW, I still don't understand why below won't already work: ===8<=== diff --git a/mm/userfaultfd.c b/mm/userfaultfd.c index 52d7d5f144b8e..33e78f52ee9f5 100644 --- a/mm/userfaultfd.c +++ b/mm/userfaultfd.c @@ -1880,13 +1880,15 @@ ssize_t move_pages(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, unsigned long dst_start, /* Check if we can move the pmd without splitting it. */ if (move_splits_huge_pmd(dst_addr, src_addr, src_start + len) || !pmd_none(dst_pmdval)) { - struct folio *folio = pmd_folio(*src_pmd); - - if (!folio || (!is_huge_zero_folio(folio) && - !PageAnonExclusive(&folio->page))) { - spin_unlock(ptl); - err = -EBUSY; - break; + if (pmd_present(*src_pmd)) { + struct folio *folio = pmd_folio(*src_pmd); + + if (!folio || (!is_huge_zero_folio(folio) && + !PageAnonExclusive(&folio->page))) { + spin_unlock(ptl); + err = -EBUSY; + break; + } } spin_unlock(ptl); ===8<=== Likely I missed something important.. I'll be afk for a while soon, I'll also double check (maybe early next week) on the reproducer. Thanks, -- Peter Xu