lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] hugetlb: fix uninitialized subpool pointer
From
Date
On 2/23/21 2:45 PM, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 01:55:44PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> Gerald Schaefer reported a panic on s390 in hugepage_subpool_put_pages()
>> with linux-next 5.12.0-20210222.
>> Call trace:
>> hugepage_subpool_put_pages.part.0+0x2c/0x138
>> __free_huge_page+0xce/0x310
>> alloc_pool_huge_page+0x102/0x120
>> set_max_huge_pages+0x13e/0x350
>> hugetlb_sysctl_handler_common+0xd8/0x110
>> hugetlb_sysctl_handler+0x48/0x58
>> proc_sys_call_handler+0x138/0x238
>> new_sync_write+0x10e/0x198
>> vfs_write.part.0+0x12c/0x238
>> ksys_write+0x68/0xf8
>> do_syscall+0x82/0xd0
>> __do_syscall+0xb4/0xc8
>> system_call+0x72/0x98
>>
>> This is a result of the change which moved the hugetlb page subpool
>> pointer from page->private to page[1]->private. When new pages are
>> allocated from the buddy allocator, the private field of the head
>> page will be cleared, but the private field of subpages is not modified.
>> Therefore, old values may remain.
>>
>> Fix by initializing hugetlb page subpool pointer in prep_new_huge_page().
>>
>> Fixes: f1280272ae4d ("hugetlb: use page.private for hugetlb specific page flags")
>> Reported-by: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
>
> Do we need the hugetlb_set_page_subpool() in __free_huge_page?

Yes, that is the more common case where the once active hugetlb page
will be simply added to the free list via enqueue_huge_page(). This
path does not go through prep_new_huge_page.

--
Mike Kravetz

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-24 00:07    [W:0.057 / U:1.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site