From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-ed1-f69.google.com (mail-ed1-f69.google.com [209.85.208.69])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC396B0006
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 19:08:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-ed1-f69.google.com with SMTP id m45-v6so7368125edc.2
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:08:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b4-v6si5508915ejd.235.2018.11.13.16.08.33
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:08:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in mm/page_alloc.c
References: <CAEAjamseRRHu+TaTkd1TwpLNm8mtDGP=2K0WKLF0wH-3iLcW_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181109084353.GA5321@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20181113094305.GM15120@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20181113151503.fd370e28cb9df5a0933e9b04@linux-foundation.org>
 <d88fae5c-e12d-ca35-d200-587a2ff02ec9@suse.cz>
 <20181113153204.ea0c0895866838de9e3bc8d0@linux-foundation.org>
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Message-ID: <1f4439c8-d669-a1ac-53f5-36c04da72a51@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 01:05:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181113153204.ea0c0895866838de9e3bc8d0@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Kyungtae Kim <kt0755@gmail.com>, pavel.tatashin@microsoft.com, osalvador@suse.de, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aaron.lu@intel.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, lifeasageek@gmail.com, threeearcat@gmail.com, syzkaller@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>

On 11/14/18 12:32 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2018 00:23:28 +0100 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/14/18 12:15 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 10:43:05 +0100 Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>> @@ -4364,6 +4353,15 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid,
>>>>  	gfp_t alloc_mask; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
>>>>  	struct alloc_context ac = { };
>>>>  
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * There are several places where we assume that the order value is sane
>>>> +	 * so bail out early if the request is out of bound.
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	if (unlikely(order >= MAX_ORDER)) {
>>>> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN));
>>>> +		return NULL;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> I know "everybody enables CONFIG_DEBUG_VM", but given this is fastpath,
>>> we could help those who choose not to enable it by using
>>>
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
>>> 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(order >= MAX_ORDER && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN)))
>>> 		return NULL;
>>> #endif
>>
>> Hmm, but that would mean there's still potential undefined behavior for
>> !CONFIG_DEBUG_VM, so I would prefer not to do it like that.
>>
> 
> What does "potential undefined behavior" mean here?

I mean that it becomes undefined once a caller with order >= MAX_ORDER
appears. Worse if it's directly due to a userspace action, like in this
case.