Re: [PATCH 5.15] mm: validate buddy page before using

[Xianting Tian <xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com>]

在 2022/6/20 下午8:24, Greg KH 写道:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 08:18:40PM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote:
>> 在 2022/6/20 下午8:06, Greg KH 写道:
>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 07:57:05PM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote:
>>>> 在 2022/6/20 下午7:42, Greg KH 写道:
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 06:54:44PM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote:
>>>>>> 在 2022/6/20 下午6:17, Greg KH 写道:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 12:17:45AM +0800, Xianting Tian wrote:
>>>>>>>> Commit 787af64d05cd ("mm: page_alloc: validate buddy before check its migratetype.")
>>>>>>>> fixes a bug in 1dd214b8f21c and there is a similar bug in d9dddbf55667 that
>>>>>>>> can be fixed in a similar way too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In unset_migratetype_isolate(), we also need the fix, so move page_is_buddy()
>>>>>>>> from mm/page_alloc.c to mm/internal.h
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In addition, for RISC-V arch the first 2MB RAM could be reserved for opensbi,
>>>>>>>> so it would have pfn_base=512 and mem_map began with 512th PFN when
>>>>>>>> CONFIG_FLATMEM=y.
>>>>>>>> But __find_buddy_pfn algorithm thinks the start pfn 0, it could get 0 pfn or
>>>>>>>> less than the pfn_base value. We need page_is_buddy() to verify the buddy to
>>>>>>>> prevent accessing an invalid buddy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fixes: d9dddbf55667 ("mm/page_alloc: prevent merging between isolated and other pageblocks")
>>>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>>>> Reported-by: zjb194813@alibaba-inc.com
>>>>>>>> Reported-by: tianhu.hh@alibaba-inc.com
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xianting Tian <xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>      mm/internal.h       | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>      mm/page_alloc.c     | 37 +++----------------------------------
>>>>>>>>      mm/page_isolation.c |  3 ++-
>>>>>>>>      3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>>>>>>> What is the commit id of this in Linus's tree?
>>>>>> It is also this one，
>>>>>>
>>>>>> commit 787af64d05cd528aac9ad16752d11bb1c6061bb9
>>>>>> Author: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>>>>>> Date:   Wed Mar 30 15:45:43 2022 -0700
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        mm: page_alloc: validate buddy before check its migratetype.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        Whenever a buddy page is found, page_is_buddy() should be called to
>>>>>>        check its validity.  Add the missing check during pageblock merge check.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        Fixes: 1dd214b8f21c ("mm: page_alloc: avoid merging non-fallbackable
>>>>>> pageblocks with others")
>>>>>>        Link:
>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220330154208.71aca532@gandalf.local.home/
>>>>>>        Reported-and-tested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
>>>>>>        Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>>>>>>        Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>>>>> This commit looks nothing like what you posted here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why the vast difference with no explaination as to why these are so
>>>>> different from the other backports you provided here?  Also why is the
>>>>> subject lines changed?
>>>> Yes, the changes of 5.15 are not same with others branches, because we need
>>>> additional fix for 5.15,
>>>>
>>>> You can check it in the thread:
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/435B45C3-E6A5-43B2-A5A2-318C748691FC@nvidia.com/ <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/435B45C3-E6A5-43B2-A5A2-318C748691FC@nvidia.com/>
>>>>
>>>> Right. But pfn_valid_within() was removed since 5.15. So your fix is
>>>> required for kernels between 5.15 and 5.17 (inclusive).
>>> What is "your fix" here?
>>>
>>> This change differs a lot from what is in Linus's tree now, so this all
>>> needs to be resend and fixed up as I mention above if we are going to be
>>> able to take this.  As-is, it's all not correct so are dropped.
>> I think, for branches except 5.15,  you can just backport Zi Yan's commit
>> 787af64d05cd in Linus tree. I won't send more patches further,
> So just for 5.18?  I am confused.
Sorry, 5.18 needs the same fix with 5.15.  I will send the patch for it.
>
>> For 5.15, because it need additional fix except commit 787af64d05cd,  I will
>> send a new patch as your comments.
>>
>> Is it ok for you?
> No, please send fixed up patches for all branches you want them applied
> to as I do not understand what to do here at all, sorry.
Understood. I will send for all branches.
>
> greg k-h