On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 3:15 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 03:05:44PM -0700, Vishal Moola wrote: > > Commit 9acad7ba3e25 ("hugetlb: use vmf_anon_prepare() instead of > > anon_vma_prepare()") may bailout after allocating a folio if we do not > > hold the mmap lock. When this occurs, vmf_anon_prepare() will release the > > vma lock. Hugetlb then attempts to call restore_reserve_on_error(), > > which depends on the vma lock being held. > > > > We can move vmf_anon_prepare() prior to the folio allocation in order to > > avoid calling restore_reserve_on_error() without the vma lock. > > But now you're calling vmf_anon_prepare() in the wrong place -- before > we've determined that we need an anon folio. So we'll create an > anon_vma even when we don't need one for this vma. That's true. Though that can be addressed through something like: if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_MAYSHARE)) { ret = vmf_anon_prepare(vmf); if (unlikely(ret)) goto out; } > This is definitely a pre-existing bug which you've exposed by making it > happen more easily. Needs a different fix though. I interpreted the bug report to showcase how restore_reserve_on_error() depends on the vma lock being held - and vmf_anon_prepare() drops that lock by the time we get to restore_reserve_on_error(). In this case, this would address it without reworking restore_reserve_on_error(). There very well could be something completely different going on, however I have no ideas as to what that may be.