Re: [syzbot] [mm?] kernel BUG in const_folio_flags (2)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 28.11.24 12:42, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:52:42 +0100 David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
On 23.11.24 08:31, syzbot wrote:
Hello,

syzbot found the following issue on:

HEAD commit:    9fb2cfa4635a Merge tag 'pull-ufs' of git://git.kernel.org/..
git tree:       upstream
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=10042930580000
kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c4515f1b6a4e50b7
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9f9a7f73fb079b2387a6
compiler:       gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
syz repro:      https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=105ff2e8580000

Downloadable assets:
disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/7c0c61a15f60/disk-9fb2cfa4.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/3363d84eeb74/vmlinux-9fb2cfa4.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/2b1a270af550/bzImage-9fb2cfa4.xz

IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+9f9a7f73fb079b2387a6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Staring at the console output:

[  520.222112][ T7269] page: refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x1403 pfn:0x125be

->mapping is cleared for a order9 page
> >> [ 520.362213][ T7269] head: order:9 mapcount:0 entire_mapcount:0 nr_pages_mapped:0 pincount:0
[  520.411963][ T7269] memcg:ffff88807c73c000
[  520.492069][ T7269] flags: 0xfff00000000040(head|node=0|zone=1|lastcpupid=0x7ff)
[  520.499844][ T7269] raw: 00fff00000000000 ffffea0000490001 dead000000000122 dead000000000400
[  520.551982][ T7269] raw: 00000000000014d0 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
[  520.560912][ T7269] head: 00fff00000000040 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000
[  520.672020][ T7269] head: 0000000000001245 0000000000000000 00000001ffffffff ffff88807c73c000
[  520.735699][ T7269] head: 00fff00000000209 ffffea0000490001 ffffffffffffffff 0000000000000000
[  520.901989][ T7269] head: 0000000000000200 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000
[  520.991952][ T7269] page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail(page))
[  521.086487][ T7269] page_owner tracks the page as allocated
[  521.132208][ T7269] page last allocated via order 0, migratetype Movable, gfp_mask 0x3d24ca(GFP_TRANSHUGE|__GFP_NORETRY|

^order 0 looks wrong, but let;s not get distracted.

__GFP_THISNODE), pid 7321, tgid 7321 (syz.1.194), ts 520201520231, free_ts 520193076092
[  521.272012][ T7269]  post_alloc_hook+0x2d1/0x350
[  521.276977][ T7269]  __alloc_pages_direct_compact+0x20e/0x590
[  521.314428][ T7269]  __alloc_pages_noprof+0x182b/0x25a0
[  521.319975][ T7269]  alloc_pages_mpol_noprof+0x282/0x610
[  521.420092][ T7269]  folio_alloc_mpol_noprof+0x36/0xd0
[  521.483167][ T7269]  vma_alloc_folio_noprof+0xee/0x1b0
[  521.539677][ T7269]  do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page+0x258/0x2ae0
...
[  521.851719][ T7269] page last free pid 7323 tgid 7321 stack trace:
[  521.972611][ T7269]  free_unref_folios+0xa87/0x14f0
[  521.977735][ T7269]  folios_put_refs+0x587/0x7b0
[  522.072508][ T7269]  folio_batch_move_lru+0x2c4/0x3b0
[  522.077794][ T7269]  __folio_batch_add_and_move+0x35b/0xc60
[  522.191992][ T7269]  reclaim_folio_list+0x205/0x3a0
[  522.197131][ T7269]  reclaim_pages+0x481/0x650
[  522.201760][ T7269]  madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range+0x163b/0x20d0
...


So we allocated a order-9 anonymous folio, but suddenly find it via shmem in the pagecache?

Is this some crazy use-after-free / double-free, where we end up freeing a shmem folio
that is still in the pagecache? Once freed, it gets merged in the buddy, and we then re-allocate
it as part of a PMD THP; but shmem still finds it in the pagecache, and as the it's now suddenly

It is not in the pagecache.

next_uptodate_folio() finds it there? Which is .. via the pagecache xas_next_entry()?

But good point on the mapping. If we would have freed a folio while still in the pagecache (before truncation), we'd likely have gotten an error from free_page_is_bad().

Well, unless check_pages_enabled() is false.

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux