linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>,
	"Lai, Yi" <yi1.lai@linux.intel.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@google.com>,
	Tangquan Zheng <zhengtangquan@oppo.com>,
	Lance Yang <ioworker0@gmail.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
	"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
	Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>,
	Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix the race between collapse and PT_RECLAIM under per-vma lock
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 17:30:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <064cca31-442d-4847-b353-26dc5fd0603c@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6f9dacf-d520-4cc3-88ac-c5937916aa2c@linux.alibaba.com>



On 8/5/25 4:56 PM, Baolin Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2025/8/5 16:17, Qi Zheng wrote:
>> Hi Baolin,
>>
>> On 8/5/25 3:53 PM, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2025/8/5 14:42, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>>> Hi Barry,
>>>>
>>>> On 8/5/25 11:54 AM, Barry Song wrote:
>>>>> From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> The check_pmd_still_valid() call during collapse is currently only
>>>>> protected by the mmap_lock in write mode, which was sufficient when
>>>>> pt_reclaim always ran under mmap_lock in read mode. However, since
>>>>> madvise_dontneed can now execute under a per-VMA lock, this assumption
>>>>> is no longer valid. As a result, a race condition can occur between
>>>>> collapse and PT_RECLAIM, potentially leading to a kernel panic.
>>>>
>>>> There is indeed a race condition here. And after applying this patch, I
>>>> can no longer reproduce the problem locally (I was able to reproduce it
>>>> stably locally last night).
>>>>
>>>> But I still can't figure out how this race condtion causes the
>>>> following panic:
>>>>
>>>> exit_mmap
>>>> --> mmap_read_lock()
>>>>      unmap_vmas()
>>>>      --> pte_offset_map_lock
>>>>          --> rcu_read_lock()
>>>>              check if the pmd entry is a PTE page
>>>>              ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, &pmdval)  <-- ptl is NULL
>>>>              spin_lock(ptl)                  <-- PANIC!!
>>>>
>>>> If this PTE page is freed by pt_reclaim (via RCU), then the ptl can 
>>>> not be NULL.
>>>>
>>>> The collapse holds mmap write lock, so it is impossible to be 
>>>> concurrent
>>>> with exit_mmap().
>>>>
>>>> Confusing. :(
>>>
>>> IIUC, the issue is not caused by the concurrency between exit_mmap 
>>> and collapse, but rather by the concurrency between pt_reclaim and 
>>> collapse.
>>>
>>> Before this patch, khugepaged might incorrectly restore a PTE 
>>> pagetable that had already been freed.
>>>
>>> pt_reclaim has cleared the pmd entry and freed the PTE page table. 
>>> However, due to the race condition, check_pmd_still_valid() still 
>>> passes and continues to attempt the collapse:
>>>
>>> _pmd = pmdp_collapse_flush(vma, address, pmd); ---> returns a none 
>>> pmd entry (the original pmd entry has been cleared)
>>>
>>> pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, &_pmd, address, &pte_ptl); ---> returns 
>>> pte == NULL
>>>
>>> Then khugepaged will restore the old PTE pagetable with an invalid 
>>> pmd entry:
>>>
>>> pmd_populate(mm, pmd, pmd_pgtable(_pmd));
>>>
>>> So when the process exits and trys to free the mapping of the 
>>> process, traversing the invalid pmd table will lead to a crash.
>>
>> CPU0                         CPU1
>> ====                         ====
>>
>> collapse
>> --> pmd_populate(mm, pmd, pmd_pgtable(_pmd));
>>      mmap_write_unlock
>>                               exit_mmap
>>                               --> hold mmap lock
>>                                   __pte_offset_map_lock
>>                                   --> pte = __pte_offset_map(pmd, 
>> addr, &pmdval);
>>                                       if (unlikely(!pte))
>>                                           return pte;   <-- will return
> 
> __pte_offset_map() might not return NULL? Because the 'pmd_populate(mm, 
> pmd, pmd_pgtable(_pmd))' could populate a valid page (although the 
> '_pmd' entry is NONE), but it is not the original pagetable page.

CPU0                          CPU1
====                          ====

collapse
--> check_pmd_still_valid
                               vma read lock
                               pt_reclaim clear the pmd entry and will 
free the PTE page (via RCU)
                               vma read unlock

     vma write lock
     _pmd = pmdp_collapse_flush(vma, address, pmd) <-- pmd_none(_pmd)
     pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, &_pmd, address, &pte_ptl); <-- pte is 
NULL
     pmd_populate(mm, pmd, pmd_pgtable(_pmd)); <-- populate a valid page?
     vma write unlock

The above is the concurrent scenario you mentioned, right?

What types of this 'valid page' could be? If __pte_offset_map() returns
non-NULL, then it is a PTE page. Even if it is not the original one, it
should not cause panic. Did I miss some key information? :(

> 
>> IIUC, in this case, if we get an invalid pmd entry, we will retrun
>> directly instead of causing a crash?
>>
>>>
>>> Barry, please correct me if I have misunderstood something.
>>>
>>
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-05  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-05  3:54 Barry Song
2025-08-05  5:20 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-05  6:41 ` Baolin Wang
2025-08-05  6:42 ` Qi Zheng
2025-08-05  7:53   ` Baolin Wang
2025-08-05  8:17     ` Qi Zheng
2025-08-05  8:56       ` Baolin Wang
2025-08-05  9:30         ` Qi Zheng [this message]
2025-08-05  9:50           ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-05 10:07             ` Baolin Wang
2025-08-05 10:26               ` Qi Zheng
2025-08-05  8:02 ` David Hildenbrand

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=064cca31-442d-4847-b353-26dc5fd0603c@bytedance.com \
    --to=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    --cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lokeshgidra@google.com \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=yi1.lai@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=zhengtangquan@oppo.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