From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2841BC021B2 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 23:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 77952280004; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 18:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 7289C6B00AD; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 18:52:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5A24F280004; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 18:52:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3486D6B00AC for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 18:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25EA831D5 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 23:52:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83141975532.21.2E508A3 Received: from mail-qt1-f176.google.com (mail-qt1-f176.google.com [209.85.160.176]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0D6740014 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 23:52:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b="P2TN7/FA"; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of surenb@google.com designates 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=surenb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1740095565; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=c46tN4hf+7hVkvdJdWWtK/zSId/3W4TvKEAqueak028=; b=bHhzUv4Ensn53SQdPr0/5sfxM5Jh//3bswHL3bqXF4DzVgV5iU9PzChI7jlpp3NK4JI/ew Lz+AGTAnh2dJrSqHkWtdTKekAIK0VLfFDan8LZvyBq2Ycah1run7X5QawfXaR4G6fbuI06 qdP+ZdPHYbMsD+Yt1UWeqQQGbNBHqqA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b="P2TN7/FA"; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of surenb@google.com designates 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=surenb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1740095565; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=aP0MEbXcrLv9PMOaCpYMrCNLXsXhBSDUN85hvotXZbOV7/A9YZZ49plDJH77OL7hsz3UDl bXZqX9iiMXEgjNnhw6x9KSdw3HCMmSDfrY47fGiV2UG/R++rthQjiDjvAy7eAr//DjAIxT 51kCXZDO9syjuRaiNtSiyJG2rTP4pgA= Received: by mail-qt1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-472098e6e75so57341cf.1 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:52:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1740095564; x=1740700364; darn=kvack.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=c46tN4hf+7hVkvdJdWWtK/zSId/3W4TvKEAqueak028=; b=P2TN7/FA3ybnWfa+w6Q2IxrDr9Va6tBCMa0d36Fe3XQ7vi3mehzNEZeeZawzX8IgQx KXYi8J6VLcBN5PcpJgW9DeA8llyuS9J/I9yt/ZppWexpQpW75Mbaje3V0ZAJCwVnKerT tVwLULX7WkK5h4d3Kmh+i1Ac6QVcwl3rs2M+/+HxfhnHql+WLTSEyeYU0h9Hd9l1EWZT LZlXhBzY6VGb00lUBvtd31aN1WEJRjAXwIvHt9vIRmqMy3SLw8Y9Q0Zyfai18huwu20J 8h5xVeARONkIROGCNVz/bvzi14Ny5fuqxYO4uYF/h7EpK2Y95/eAfrp1oecH3skqYr/d 04kQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1740095564; x=1740700364; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=c46tN4hf+7hVkvdJdWWtK/zSId/3W4TvKEAqueak028=; b=b/1NrcakXI5D9d3iXKpSWsMFRdBBFkKJ9qcdhl4wuB03z2ZrqOlccMPIuDdyWT5IG0 4kYWiupX7TJvbb829XKMbWlX3C/UV0QDzf9MGS5pXYxWffRvgr37OkFuakrrTNO32L2v xMDmYzmSHzH79q94XOZc/wrNpvriwY4f1aLiBchH4Ajefoo6vf8p+2UkY/1OnqadhIu2 rAxh/wl5DbS/UwQQlJkK6D3tH2Gi/msDmFTdzsE+whmzf/YMiVF2M1g1cZ2QfdEnPXTY 3jopSYTQCrtCO+/QGSL49PR41keee0O86V4iyl2RgS0KncTVFBC02tCTdGinECvRZv6q utIg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXp1w+UY3nYRirQRslEaEI+XyWdw1aDOdRAHRfzC7b6VJKZU3OK16xPblJ3NYscpMwLZmJ7E7thaQ==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz6xDPWhu2UZhsWu4SCmPYaaVT3HwKqww3y9dvPG+f3TT2QbYVp DWZBZbGs6D7oGmQrjLT31klvuEhK24o+8XMLgu+/arS4gCqtOqZAtCWwt7lJvDZaeEEh2L4NZa8 fAjjBZF7zI3+Q3U6jJVzaOY4m5otcVatpKAlw X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuPpmnQyQ+qnxMRobOceTSHnc8gBJ3gbInIo3/gjzU3z4yrrwJ9wCAjscmP8U4 54o7ZzO0NW9sbX3UUpk1Irdbb2xrXElxWFqJctlNcyXto1DPbbD+FWXlr8l4wJqNYurS5/onA X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGz4neRkqcA0HZFZ+biSXK3VHnirH7t8uTqu6wfI6/ldofG7BwfNGYmXTCECyX/axcnKMtrNMBNuMsPJyqqtiQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:13d1:b0:471:b772:c717 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-472238f3084mr1343091cf.26.1740095563788; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:52:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250219112519.92853-1-21cnbao@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:52:32 -0800 X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZm5g2drflQrR_FBTcG-vcmlKc9N-a6tbhQ1zUyvg_KmGqWyMiK1aHgAYSw Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: Fix kernel BUG when userfaultfd_move encounters swapcache To: Peter Xu Cc: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Lokesh Gidra , linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhengtangquan@oppo.com, Barry Song , Andrea Arcangeli , Al Viro , Axel Rasmussen , Brian Geffon , Christian Brauner , David Hildenbrand , Hugh Dickins , Jann Horn , Kalesh Singh , "Liam R . Howlett" , Matthew Wilcox , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Nicolas Geoffray , Ryan Roberts , Shuah Khan , ZhangPeng , Yu Zhao Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: F0D6740014 X-Stat-Signature: rqdkkqbf4c4jm8yqpqfkr4pfgqyqti5o X-HE-Tag: 1740095564-116274 X-HE-Meta: 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 5/71f9df sl1clnRmo5FM87yev0BIVhcPEsP6aZJ9xU8RAFUs3tus1krTl94QvN4HIs/PyFWra0IRq1GgoCEg3DJnstm3nix08W2U/5UTqWZDQNT3fCX5yPham+S/6qSFsSgl2/c8K2DErB4cJ34/EPCati4YCGFa7I0WcYN+Huf2HME4S6GKc/jKqzSLHooMohFbsCD3nZQW6EjrMxTmW6RHvK8ovNf1Y3X0395V0xXujkfG+xkL4FuM+kJwte5Jt4BZ0o49NUYS9t2xXmBx+Z7hUaoRQeRIWrIiI3lMQXE+GoVR1PuvMDzVu4EieZDJGZC8D0yY3bTpKkx0+iOSlvyQ= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 3:47=E2=80=AFPM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 2:59=E2=80=AFPM Peter Xu wrot= e: > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 12:04:40PM +1300, Barry Song wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 11:15=E2=80=AFAM Peter Xu = wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 09:37:50AM +1300, Barry Song wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 7:27=E2=80=AFAM Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 3:25=E2=80=AFAM Barry Song <21cnbao@gma= il.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Barry Song > > > > > > > > > > > > > > userfaultfd_move() checks whether the PTE entry is present or= a > > > > > > > swap entry. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - If the PTE entry is present, move_present_pte() handles fol= io > > > > > > > migration by setting: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > src_folio->index =3D linear_page_index(dst_vma, dst_addr); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - If the PTE entry is a swap entry, move_swap_pte() simply co= pies > > > > > > > the PTE to the new dst_addr. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This approach is incorrect because even if the PTE is a swap > > > > > > > entry, it can still reference a folio that remains in the swa= p > > > > > > > cache. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If do_swap_page() is triggered, it may locate the folio in th= e > > > > > > > swap cache. However, during add_rmap operations, a kernel pan= ic > > > > > > > can occur due to: > > > > > > > page_pgoff(folio, page) !=3D linear_page_index(vma, address) > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the report and reproducer! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > $./a.out > /dev/null > > > > > > > [ 13.336953] page: refcount:6 mapcount:1 mapping:00000000f4= 3db19c index:0xffffaf150 pfn:0x4667c > > > > > > > [ 13.337520] head: order:2 mapcount:1 entire_mapcount:0 nr_= pages_mapped:1 pincount:0 > > > > > > > [ 13.337716] memcg:ffff00000405f000 > > > > > > > [ 13.337849] anon flags: 0x3fffc0000020459(locked|uptodate|= dirty|owner_priv_1|head|swapbacked|node=3D0|zone=3D0|lastcpupid=3D0xffff) > > > > > > > [ 13.338630] raw: 03fffc0000020459 ffff80008507b538 ffff800= 08507b538 ffff000006260361 > > > > > > > [ 13.338831] raw: 0000000ffffaf150 0000000000004000 0000000= 600000000 ffff00000405f000 > > > > > > > [ 13.339031] head: 03fffc0000020459 ffff80008507b538 ffff80= 008507b538 ffff000006260361 > > > > > > > [ 13.339204] head: 0000000ffffaf150 0000000000004000 000000= 0600000000 ffff00000405f000 > > > > > > > [ 13.339375] head: 03fffc0000000202 fffffdffc0199f01 ffffff= ff00000000 0000000000000001 > > > > > > > [ 13.339546] head: 0000000000000004 0000000000000000 000000= 00ffffffff 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > [ 13.339736] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_pgoff= (folio, page) !=3D linear_page_index(vma, address)) > > > > > > > [ 13.340190] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > > > > > > [ 13.340316] kernel BUG at mm/rmap.c:1380! > > > > > > > [ 13.340683] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [= #1] PREEMPT SMP > > > > > > > [ 13.340969] Modules linked in: > > > > > > > [ 13.341257] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 107 Comm: a.out Not tainted= 6.14.0-rc3-gcf42737e247a-dirty #299 > > > > > > > [ 13.341470] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) > > > > > > > [ 13.341671] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DI= T -SSBS BTYPE=3D--) > > > > > > > [ 13.341815] pc : __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 > > > > > > > [ 13.341920] lr : __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 > > > > > > > [ 13.342018] sp : ffff80008752bb20 > > > > > > > [ 13.342093] x29: ffff80008752bb20 x28: fffffdffc0199f00 x2= 7: 0000000000000001 > > > > > > > [ 13.342404] x26: 0000000000000000 x25: 0000000000000001 x2= 4: 0000000000000001 > > > > > > > [ 13.342575] x23: 0000ffffaf0d0000 x22: 0000ffffaf0d0000 x2= 1: fffffdffc0199f00 > > > > > > > [ 13.342731] x20: fffffdffc0199f00 x19: ffff000006210700 x1= 8: 00000000ffffffff > > > > > > > [ 13.342881] x17: 6c203d2120296567 x16: 6170202c6f696c6f x1= 5: 662866666f67705f > > > > > > > [ 13.343033] x14: 6567617028454741 x13: 2929737365726464 x1= 2: ffff800083728ab0 > > > > > > > [ 13.343183] x11: ffff800082996bf8 x10: 0000000000000fd7 x9= : ffff80008011bc40 > > > > > > > [ 13.343351] x8 : 0000000000017fe8 x7 : 00000000fffff000 x6= : ffff8000829eebf8 > > > > > > > [ 13.343498] x5 : c0000000fffff000 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3= : 0000000000000000 > > > > > > > [ 13.343645] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff0000062db980 x0= : 000000000000005f > > > > > > > [ 13.343876] Call trace: > > > > > > > [ 13.344045] __page_check_anon_rmap+0xa0/0xb0 (P) > > > > > > > [ 13.344234] folio_add_anon_rmap_ptes+0x22c/0x320 > > > > > > > [ 13.344333] do_swap_page+0x1060/0x1400 > > > > > > > [ 13.344417] __handle_mm_fault+0x61c/0xbc8 > > > > > > > [ 13.344504] handle_mm_fault+0xd8/0x2e8 > > > > > > > [ 13.344586] do_page_fault+0x20c/0x770 > > > > > > > [ 13.344673] do_translation_fault+0xb4/0xf0 > > > > > > > [ 13.344759] do_mem_abort+0x48/0xa0 > > > > > > > [ 13.344842] el0_da+0x58/0x130 > > > > > > > [ 13.344914] el0t_64_sync_handler+0xc4/0x138 > > > > > > > [ 13.345002] el0t_64_sync+0x1ac/0x1b0 > > > > > > > [ 13.345208] Code: aa1503e0 f000f801 910f6021 97ff5779 (d42= 10000) > > > > > > > [ 13.345504] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > > > > > > > [ 13.345715] note: a.out[107] exited with irqs disabled > > > > > > > [ 13.345954] note: a.out[107] exited with preempt_count 2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fully fixing it would be quite complex, requiring similar han= dling > > > > > > > of folios as done in move_present_pte. > > > > > > > > > > > > How complex would that be? Is it a matter of adding > > > > > > folio_maybe_dma_pinned() checks, doing folio_move_anon_rmap() a= nd > > > > > > folio->index =3D linear_page_index like in move_present_pte() o= r > > > > > > something more? > > > > > > > > > > My main concern is still with large folios that require a split_f= olio() > > > > > during move_pages(), as the entire folio shares the same index an= d > > > > > anon_vma. However, userfaultfd_move() moves pages individually, > > > > > making a split necessary. > > > > > > > > > > However, in split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(), there is a: > > > > > > > > > > if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) > > > > > return -EBUSY; > > > > > > > > > > This is likely true for swapcache, right? However, even for move_= present_pte(), > > > > > it simply returns -EBUSY: > > > > > > > > > > move_pages_pte() > > > > > { > > > > > /* at this point we have src_folio locked */ > > > > > if (folio_test_large(src_folio)) { > > > > > /* split_folio() can block */ > > > > > pte_unmap(&orig_src_pte); > > > > > pte_unmap(&orig_dst_pte); > > > > > src_pte =3D dst_pte =3D NULL; > > > > > err =3D split_folio(src_folio); > > > > > if (err) > > > > > goto out; > > > > > > > > > > /* have to reacquire the folio after it g= ot split */ > > > > > folio_unlock(src_folio); > > > > > folio_put(src_folio); > > > > > src_folio =3D NULL; > > > > > goto retry; > > > > > } > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > Do we need a folio_wait_writeback() before calling split_folio()? > > > > > > > > Maybe no need in the first version to fix the immediate bug? > > > > > > > > It's also not always the case to hit writeback here. IIUC, writebac= k only > > > > happens for a short window when the folio was just added into swapc= ache. > > > > MOVE can happen much later after that anytime before a swapin. My > > > > understanding is that's also what Matthew wanted to point out. It = may be > > > > better justified of that in a separate change with some performance > > > > measurements. > > > > > > The bug we=E2=80=99re discussing occurs precisely within the short wi= ndow you > > > mentioned. > > > > > > 1. add_to_swap: The folio is added to swapcache. > > > 2. try_to_unmap: PTEs are converted to swap entries. > > > 3. pageout > > > 4. Swapcache is cleared. > > > > Hmm, I see. I was expecting step 4 to be "writeback is cleared".. or at > > least that should be step 3.5, as IIUC "writeback" needs to be cleared > > before "swapcache" bit being cleared. > > > > > > > > The issue happens between steps 2 and 4, where the PTE is not present= , but > > > the folio is still in swapcache - the current code does move_swap_pte= () but does > > > not fixup folio->index within swapcache. > > > > One thing I'm still not clear here is why it's a race condition, rather > > than more severe than that. I mean, folio->index is definitely wrong, = then > > as long as the page still in swapcache, we should be able to move the s= wp > > entry over to dest addr of UFFDIO_MOVE, read on dest addr, then it'll s= ee > > the page in swapcache with the wrong folio->index already and trigger. > > > > I wrote a quick test like that, it actually won't trigger.. > > > > I had a closer look in the code, I think it's because do_swap_page() ha= s > > the logic to detect folio->index matching first, and allocate a new fol= io > > if it doesn't match in ksm_might_need_to_copy(). IIUC that was for > > ksm.. but it looks like it's functioning too here. > > > > ksm_might_need_to_copy: > > if (folio_test_ksm(folio)) { > > if (folio_stable_node(folio) && > > !(ksm_run & KSM_RUN_UNMERGE)) > > return folio; /* no need to copy it */ > > } else if (!anon_vma) { > > return folio; /* no need to copy it */ > > } else if (folio->index =3D=3D linear_page_index(vma, addr) && = <---------- [1] > > anon_vma->root =3D=3D vma->anon_vma->root) { > > return folio; /* still no need to copy it */ > > } > > ... > > > > new_folio =3D vma_alloc_folio(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE, 0, vma, add= r); <---- [2] > > ... > > > > So I believe what I hit is at [1] it sees index doesn't match, then it > > decided to allocate a new folio. In this case, it won't hit your BUG > > because it'll be "folio !=3D swapcache" later, so it'll setup the > > folio->index for the new one, rather than the sanity check. > > > > Do you know how your case got triggered, being able to bypass the above= [1] > > which should check folio->index already? > > To understand the change I tried applying the proposed patch to both > mm-unstable and Linus' ToT and got conflicts for both trees. Barry, > which baseline are you using? Oops, never mind. My mistake. Copying from the email messed up tabs... It applies cleanly. > > > > > > > > > My point is that if we want a proper fix for mTHP, we'd better handle= writeback. > > > Otherwise, this isn=E2=80=99t much different from directly returning = -EBUSY as proposed > > > in this RFC. > > > > > > For small folios, there=E2=80=99s no split_folio issue, making it rel= atively > > > simpler. Lokesh > > > mentioned plans to madvise NOHUGEPAGE in ART, so fixing small folios = is likely > > > the first priority. > > > > Agreed. > > > > -- > > Peter Xu > >