6.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx> commit f83913f8c5b882a312e72b7669762f8a5c9385e4 upstream. A syzbot stress test reported that create_empty_buffers() called from nilfs_lookup_dirty_data_buffers() can cause a general protection fault. Analysis using its reproducer revealed that the back reference "mapping" from a page/folio has been changed to NULL after dirty page/folio gang lookup in nilfs_lookup_dirty_data_buffers(). Fix this issue by excluding pages/folios from being collected if, after acquiring a lock on each page/folio, its back reference "mapping" differs from the pointer to the address space struct that held the page/folio. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230805132038.6435-1-konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx> Reported-by: syzbot+0ad741797f4565e7e2d2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Closes: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/0000000000002930a705fc32b231@xxxxxxxxxx Tested-by: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- fs/nilfs2/segment.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) --- a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c +++ b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c @@ -725,6 +725,11 @@ static size_t nilfs_lookup_dirty_data_bu struct folio *folio = fbatch.folios[i]; folio_lock(folio); + if (unlikely(folio->mapping != mapping)) { + /* Exclude folios removed from the address space */ + folio_unlock(folio); + continue; + } head = folio_buffers(folio); if (!head) { create_empty_buffers(&folio->page, i_blocksize(inode), 0);
