On 2024/2/8 07:06, Nhat Pham wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 3:54 AM <chengming.zhou@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> We may encounter duplicate entry in the zswap_store():
>>
>> 1. swap slot that freed to per-cpu swap cache, doesn't invalidate
>> the zswap entry, then got reused. This has been fixed.
>>
>> 2. !exclusive load mode, swapin folio will leave its zswap entry
>> on the tree, then swapout again. This has been removed.
>>
>> 3. one folio can be dirtied again after zswap_store(), so need to
>> zswap_store() again. This should be handled correctly.
>>
>> So we must invalidate the old duplicate entry before insert the
>> new one, which actually doesn't have to be done at the beginning
>> of zswap_store(). And this is a normal situation, we shouldn't
>> WARN_ON(1) in this case, so delete it. (The WARN_ON(1) seems want
>> to detect swap entry UAF problem? But not very necessary here.)
>>
>> The good point is that we don't need to lock tree twice in the
>> store success path.
>>
>> Note we still need to invalidate the old duplicate entry in the
>> store failure path, otherwise the new data in swapfile could be
>> overwrite by the old data in zswap pool when lru writeback.
>>
>> We have to do this even when !zswap_enabled since zswap can be
>> disabled anytime. If the folio store success before, then got
>> dirtied again but zswap disabled, we won't invalidate the old
>> duplicate entry in the zswap_store(). So later lru writeback
>> may overwrite the new data in swapfile.
>>
>> Fixes: 42c06a0e8ebe ("mm: kill frontswap")
>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Chris Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Sorry for being late to the party, and thanks for fixing this, Chengming!
Thanks for your review! :)
