linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.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>,
	Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>, Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
	Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] mm/huge_memory: prevent NULL pointer dereference in try_folio_split_to_order()
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 09:41:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <FCFED9E9-56A9-4260-8B42-D0BCFC83C506@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <875584d7-5a68-4f7a-8549-2a9cd6c7f9d8@kernel.org>

On 20 Nov 2025, at 4:25, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:

> On 11/20/25 04:59, Zi Yan wrote:
>> folio_split_supported() used in try_folio_split_to_order() requires
>> folio->mapping to be non NULL, but current try_folio_split_to_order() does
>> not check it. Add the check to prevent NULL pointer dereference.
>>
>> There is no issue in the current code, since try_folio_split_to_order() is
>> only used in truncate_inode_partial_folio(), where folio->mapping is not
>> NULL.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>   include/linux/huge_mm.h | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>> index 1d439de1ca2c..0d55354e3a34 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>> @@ -407,6 +407,13 @@ static inline int split_huge_page_to_order(struct page *page, unsigned int new_o
>>   static inline int try_folio_split_to_order(struct folio *folio,
>>   		struct page *page, unsigned int new_order)
>>   {
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Folios that just got truncated cannot get split. Signal to the
>> +	 * caller that there was a race.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (!folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio->mapping)
>> +		return -EBUSY;
>> +
>>   	if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM, /* warns= */ false))
>>   		return split_huge_page_to_order(&folio->page, new_order);
>>   	return folio_split(folio, new_order, page, NULL);
>
> I guess we'll take the one from Wei
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20251119235302.24773-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com
>
> right?

This is different. Wei’s fix is to __folio_split(), but mine is to
try_folio_split_to_order(). Both call folio_split_supported(), thus
both need the folio->mapping check.

That is also my question in the cover letter on whether we should
move folio->mapping check to folio_split_supported() and return
error code instead of bool. Otherwise, any folio_split_supported()
caller needs to check folio->mapping.

Best Regards,
Yan, Zi


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-20 14:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-20  3:59 [RFC PATCH 0/3] folio->mapping == NULL check issue Zi Yan
2025-11-20  3:59 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] mm/huge_memory: prevent NULL pointer dereference in try_folio_split_to_order() Zi Yan
2025-11-20  4:28   ` Balbir Singh
2025-11-20 14:45     ` Zi Yan
2025-11-20  9:25   ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-20 14:41     ` Zi Yan [this message]
2025-11-20 19:56       ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-21 16:41         ` Zi Yan
2025-11-21 17:09           ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-21 17:24             ` Zi Yan
2025-11-20  3:59 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm/huge_memory: add kernel-doc for folio_split_supported() Zi Yan
2025-11-20  4:37   ` Balbir Singh
2025-11-20  9:27   ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-20 14:48     ` Zi Yan
2025-11-20 20:01       ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-20  3:59 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm/memory-failure: handle min_order_for_split() error code properly Zi Yan
2025-11-20  4:45   ` Balbir Singh
2025-11-20 15:00     ` Zi Yan
2025-11-20  9:37   ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-20 14:59     ` Zi Yan

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=FCFED9E9-56A9-4260-8B42-D0BCFC83C506@nvidia.com \
    --to=ziy@nvidia.com \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.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