From: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@linux.dev>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: syzbot+237bbeed8dfe0699b7f5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, martin.lau@linux.dev,
ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
memxor@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
jolsa@kernel.org, emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, hawk@kernel.org,
toke@redhat.com, lorenzo@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@kernel.org,
clm@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: free page_pool frags via the page_pool path in bpf_xdp_shrink_data
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 22:29:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <deeacbf2-8ae3-4f32-9787-c3625d686113@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8a34148c-4704-4d8c-9c7f-cfadb523a745@iogearbox.net>
On 8/17/26 10:15 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 8/16/26 7:16 AM, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
>> On 8/16/26 11:57 AM, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
>>>> index 16845987b244..3aab5556abe2 100644
>>>> --- a/net/core/filter.c
>>>> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
>>>> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@
>>>> #include <net/inet_dscp.h>
>>>>
>>>> #include "dev.h"
>>>> +#include "netmem_priv.h"
>>>>
>>>> /* Keep the struct bpf_fib_lookup small so that it fits into a
>>>> cacheline */
>>>> static_assert(sizeof(struct bpf_fib_lookup) == 64, "struct
>>>> bpf_fib_lookup size check");
>>>> @@ -4288,6 +4289,14 @@ static bool bpf_xdp_shrink_data(struct
>>>> xdp_buff *xdp, skb_frag_t *frag,
>>>> if (mem_type == MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL) {
>>>> netmem = 0;
>>>> zc_frag = bpf_xdp_shrink_data_zc(xdp, shrink, tail,
>>>> release);
>>>> + } else if (netmem_is_pp(netmem)) {
>>>> + /* The rxq mem model does not always describe how a released
>>>> + * frag must be freed: the generic-XDP and veth paths run the
>>>> + * program on a shared rxq while the frag has been cow'd into
>>>> + * page_pool memory. Trust the page itself and return a
>>>> + * page_pool frag to its pool regardless of rxq->mem.type.
>>>> + */
>>>> + mem_type = MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> if (release) {
>>> The comment says the fix handles rxq->mem.type "regardless" of its
>>> value,
>>> but the implementation still checks MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL first.
>>> When the
>>> shared rxq has been left with mem_type == MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL by
>>> veth_xdp_rcv_one() (which writes frame->mem_type into the shared rxq on
>>> XDP_TX/XDP_REDIRECT and never restores it), a page_pool frag skips
>>> the new
>>> netmem_is_pp() branch entirely and goes to bpf_xdp_shrink_data_zc()
>>> instead.
>>>
>>> Should the comment say "regardless of rxq->mem.type, unless the rxq
>>> claims
>>> XSK memory" or should the netmem_is_pp() test be unconditional so
>>> the stale
>>> MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL case is also handled?
>>>
>>> The commit message states: "A single rxq->mem.type can be wrong in
>>> either
>>> direction." The code, however, only corrects one direction: it upgrades
>>> mem_type to MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL when the frag is a page_pool page,
>>> but it
>>> never downgrades when rxq->mem.type already says MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL
>>> and the
>>> frag is not a page_pool page.
>>>
>>> That second direction is reachable on the very path the commit message
>>> cites. veth_xdp_rcv_one() (drivers/net/veth.c:638) points the buff
>>> at the
>>> shared rxq and then, on XDP_TX/XDP_REDIRECT, writes the frame's type
>>> into
>>> it:
>>>
>>> xdp->rxq = &rq->xdp_rxq;
>>> ...
>>> case XDP_TX:
>>> xdp->rxq->mem.type = frame->mem_type;
>>> case XDP_REDIRECT:
>>> xdp->rxq->mem.type = frame->mem_type;
>>>
>>> Once one redirected frame with mem_type == MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL is
>>> TX'd or
>>> redirected, rq->xdp_rxq.mem.type stays MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL for every
>>> subsequent packet on that queue.
>>>
>>> A later frame whose frags are plain pages then reaches:
>>>
>>> } else if (netmem_is_pp(netmem)) { /* false, mem_type left as
>>> PAGE_POOL */
>>> ...
>>> __xdp_return(netmem, mem_type, false, zc_frag);
>>>
>>> and __xdp_return()'s MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL arm (net/core/xdp.c:436-446)
>>> skips
>>> the check and dereferences a garbage pool pointer:
>>>
>>> /* No need to check netmem_is_pp() as mem->type knows this a
>>> page_pool page */
>>> page_pool_put_full_netmem(netmem_get_pp(netmem), netmem,
>>> napi_direct);
>>>
>>> netmem_get_pp() reads page->pp, which for a non-page_pool page holds
>>> whatever the allocator left there.
>>>
>>> This specific crash is pre-existing rather than introduced by the
>>> patch, but
>>> the patch is the change that claims to make the frag itself
>>> authoritative,
>>> and it had the netmem in hand. Could the decision be unconditional:
>>>
>>> } else {
>>> mem_type = netmem_is_pp(netmem) ? MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL :
>>> mem_type;
>>
>> This is a non-pool page being mistreated as a pool page, and I think
>> it's a separate issue, xdp_return_buff and xdp_convert_buff_to_frame
>> hit it too, not just this path.
> Could you look into this as well, and make this a small series along
> with a BPF selftest
> which exercises/tests this bug?
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
Thanks Daniel. I'm still thinking of a unified fix( for example
__xdp_return() since that's the one place
bpf_xdp_shrink_data/xdp_return_buff/xdp_convert_buff_to_frame go
through), deciding by the page itself there handles both directions at once.
I'll work on it.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-17 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-16 3:12 [PATCH bpf] bpf: free page_pool frags via the page_pool path in bpf_xdp_shrink_data Jiayuan Chen
2026-08-16 3:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-16 5:16 ` Jiayuan Chen
2026-08-17 14:15 ` Daniel Borkmann
2026-08-17 14:29 ` Jiayuan Chen [this message]
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=deeacbf2-8ae3-4f32-9787-c3625d686113@linux.dev \
--to=jiayuan.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+237bbeed8dfe0699b7f5@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
--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