On 5/27/24 8:30 PM, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> When CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG is enabled, the following warning may
> be noticed:
>
> [ 48.299584] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 48.300092] alloc_tag was not set
> [ 48.300528] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 1361 at include/linux/alloc_tag.h:130 alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook+0x84/0xc7
> [ 48.301305] Modules linked in:
> [ 48.301553] CPU: 2 PID: 1361 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 6.10.0-rc1-00003-gac8755535862 #176
> [ 48.302196] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014
> [ 48.302752] RIP: 0010:alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook+0x84/0xc7
> [ 48.303169] Code: 8d 1c c4 48 85 db 74 4d 48 83 3b 00 75 1e 80 3d 65 02 86 04 00 75 15 48 c7 c7 11 48 1d 85 c6 05 55 02 86 04 01 e8 64 44 a5 ff <0f> 0b 48 8b 03 48 85 c0 74 21 48 83 f8 01 74 14 48 8b 50 20 48 f7
> [ 48.304411] RSP: 0018:ffff8880111b7d40 EFLAGS: 00010282
> [ 48.304916] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88800fcc9008 RCX: 0000000000000000
> [ 48.305455] RDX: 0000000080000000 RSI: ffff888014060000 RDI: ffffed1002236f97
> [ 48.305979] RBP: 0000000000001100 R08: fffffbfff0aa73a1 R09: 0000000000000000
> [ 48.306473] R10: ffffffff814515e5 R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff88800fcc9000
> [ 48.306943] R13: ffff88800b2e5cc0 R14: ffff8880111b7d90 R15: 0000000000000000
> [ 48.307529] FS: 00007faf5d1908c0(0000) GS:ffff88806cf00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [ 48.308223] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [ 48.308710] CR2: 000058fb220c9118 CR3: 00000000110cc000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0
> [ 48.309274] PKRU: 55555554
> [ 48.309804] Call Trace:
> [ 48.310029] <TASK>
> [ 48.310290] ? show_regs+0x84/0x8d
> [ 48.310722] ? alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook+0x84/0xc7
> [ 48.311298] ? __warn+0x13b/0x2ff
> [ 48.311580] ? alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook+0x84/0xc7
> [ 48.311987] ? report_bug+0x2ce/0x3ab
> [ 48.312292] ? handle_bug+0x8c/0x107
> [ 48.312563] ? exc_invalid_op+0x34/0x6f
> [ 48.312842] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
> [ 48.313173] ? this_cpu_in_panic+0x1c/0x72
> [ 48.313503] ? alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook+0x84/0xc7
> [ 48.313880] ? putname+0x143/0x14e
> [ 48.314152] kmem_cache_free+0xe9/0x214
> [ 48.314454] putname+0x143/0x14e
> [ 48.314712] do_unlinkat+0x413/0x45e
> [ 48.315001] ? __pfx_do_unlinkat+0x10/0x10
> [ 48.315388] ? __check_object_size+0x4d7/0x525
> [ 48.315744] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc+0x20/0x4a
> [ 48.316167] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc+0x20/0x4a
> [ 48.316757] ? getname_flags+0x4ed/0x500
> [ 48.317261] __x64_sys_unlink+0x42/0x4a
> [ 48.317741] do_syscall_64+0xe2/0x149
> [ 48.318171] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> [ 48.318602] RIP: 0033:0x7faf5d8850ab
> [ 48.318891] Code: fd ff ff e8 27 dd 01 00 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa b8 5f 00 00 00 0f 05 c3 0f 1f 40 00 f3 0f 1e fa b8 57 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 05 c3 0f 1f 40 00 48 8b 15 41 2d 0e 00 f7 d8
> [ 48.320649] RSP: 002b:00007ffc44982b38 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000057
> [ 48.321182] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00005ba344a44680 RCX: 00007faf5d8850ab
> [ 48.321667] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00005ba344a44430 RDI: 00007ffc44982b40
> [ 48.322139] RBP: 00007ffc44982c00 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000007
> [ 48.322598] R10: 00005ba344a44430 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> [ 48.323071] R13: 00007ffc44982b40 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> [ 48.323596] </TASK>
>
> This is due to a race when two objects are allocated from the same slab,
> which did not have an obj_exts allocated for.
>
> In such a case, the two threads will notice the NULL obj_exts and after one
> assigns slab->obj_exts, the second one will happily do the exchange if it
> reads this new assigned value.
>
> In order to avoid that, verify that the read obj_exts does not point to an
> allocated obj_exts before doing the exchange.
>
> Fixes: 09c46563ff6d ("codetag: debug: introduce OBJEXTS_ALLOC_FAIL to mark failed slab_ext allocations")
> Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
Thanks!
> ---
> mm/slub.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 0809760cf789..1373ac365a46 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -1952,7 +1952,7 @@ int alloc_slab_obj_exts(struct slab *slab, struct kmem_cache *s,
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> new_exts |= MEMCG_DATA_OBJEXTS;
> #endif
> - old_exts = slab->obj_exts;
> + old_exts = READ_ONCE(slab->obj_exts);
> handle_failed_objexts_alloc(old_exts, vec, objects);
> if (new_slab) {
> /*
> @@ -1961,7 +1961,8 @@ int alloc_slab_obj_exts(struct slab *slab, struct kmem_cache *s,
> * be simply assigned.
> */
> slab->obj_exts = new_exts;
> - } else if (cmpxchg(&slab->obj_exts, old_exts, new_exts) != old_exts) {
> + } else if ((old_exts & ~OBJEXTS_FLAGS_MASK) ||
> + cmpxchg(&slab->obj_exts, old_exts, new_exts) != old_exts) {
> /*
> * If the slab is already in use, somebody can allocate and
> * assign slabobj_exts in parallel. In this case the existing
