From: Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@gmail.com>
To: muchun.song@linux.dev, osalvador@suse.de, david@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, broonie@kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+f26d7c75c26ec19790e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v6] hugetlbfs: move lock assertions after early returns in huge_pmd_unshare()
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 10:36:09 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251014050609.349461-1-kartikey406@gmail.com> (raw)
When hugetlb_vmdelete_list() processes VMAs during truncate operations,
it may encounter VMAs where huge_pmd_unshare() is called without the
required shareable lock. This triggers an assertion failure in
hugetlb_vma_assert_locked().
The previous fix in commit dd83609b8898 ("hugetlbfs: skip VMAs without
shareable locks in hugetlb_vmdelete_list") skipped entire VMAs without
shareable locks to avoid the assertion. However, this prevented pages
from being unmapped and freed, causing a regression in fallocate(PUNCH_HOLE)
operations where pages were not freed immediately, as reported by Mark Brown.
A subsequent fix in commit 06e8ca1b3dca ("hugetlbfs: check for shareable
lock before calling huge_pmd_unshare()") addressed this by checking
__vma_shareable_lock() in the caller before calling huge_pmd_unshare().
However, a cleaner approach is to move the lock assertions in
huge_pmd_unshare() itself to after the early return checks. The assertions
are only needed when actual PMD unsharing work will be performed. If the
function returns early because sz != PMD_SIZE or the PMD is not shared,
no locks are required.
This patch removes the check added in commit 06e8ca1b3dca ("hugetlbfs:
check for shareable lock before calling huge_pmd_unshare()") and instead
moves the assertions inside huge_pmd_unshare(), keeping all the logic
within the function itself.
Reported-by: syzbot+f26d7c75c26ec19790e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=f26d7c75c26ec19790e7
Fixes: dd83609b8898 ("hugetlbfs: skip VMAs without shareable locks in hugetlb_vmdelete_list")
Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Suggested-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Tested-by: syzbot+f26d7c75c26ec19790e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/mm-commits/20250925203504.7BE02C4CEF7@smtp.kernel.org/ [v1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/mm-commits/20250928185232.BEDB6C4CEF0@smtp.kernel.org/ [v2]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20251003174553.3078839-1-kartikey406@gmail.com/ [v3]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20251008052759.469714-1-kartikey406@gmail.com/ [v4]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CADhLXY72yEVDjXWfxBUXfXhNfb8MWqwJmcb1daEHmDeFW+DRGw@mail.gmail.com/ [v5]
Signed-off-by: Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@gmail.com>
---
Changes in v6:
- Remove __vma_shareable_lock() check from __unmap_hugepage_range()
that was added in v4 (commit 06e8ca1b3dca)
- Move lock assertions after early returns in huge_pmd_unshare()
- Complete implementation of David's cleaner approach
Changes in v5:
- Incomplete: only moved assertions, forgot to remove v4 check
Changes in v4:
- Check __vma_shareable_lock() in __unmap_hugepage_range() before calling
huge_pmd_unshare() per Oscar's suggestion
Changes in v3:
- Add ZAP_FLAG_NO_UNSHARE to skip only PMD unsharing
Changes in v2:
- Skip entire VMAs without shareable locks (caused PUNCH_HOLE regression)
Changes in v1:
- Initial fix attempt
---
mm/hugetlb.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
index 85b2dac79d25..0455119716ec 100644
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -5885,7 +5885,7 @@ void __unmap_hugepage_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
}
ptl = huge_pte_lock(h, mm, ptep);
- if (__vma_shareable_lock(vma) && huge_pmd_unshare(mm, vma, address, ptep)) {
+ if (huge_pmd_unshare(mm, vma, address, ptep)) {
spin_unlock(ptl);
tlb_flush_pmd_range(tlb, address & PUD_MASK, PUD_SIZE);
force_flush = true;
@@ -7614,13 +7614,12 @@ int huge_pmd_unshare(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
p4d_t *p4d = p4d_offset(pgd, addr);
pud_t *pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr);
- i_mmap_assert_write_locked(vma->vm_file->f_mapping);
- hugetlb_vma_assert_locked(vma);
if (sz != PMD_SIZE)
return 0;
if (!ptdesc_pmd_is_shared(virt_to_ptdesc(ptep)))
return 0;
-
+ i_mmap_assert_write_locked(vma->vm_file->f_mapping);
+ hugetlb_vma_assert_locked(vma);
pud_clear(pud);
/*
* Once our caller drops the rmap lock, some other process might be
--
2.34.1
next reply other threads:[~2025-10-14 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-14 5:06 Deepanshu Kartikey [this message]
2025-10-14 9:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-14 11:35 ` Deepanshu Kartikey
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=20251014050609.349461-1-kartikey406@gmail.com \
--to=kartikey406@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=syzbot+f26d7c75c26ec19790e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.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