6.6-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 8c61291fd8500e3b35c7ec0c781b273d8cc96cde upstream.
xa_for_each() in _vm_unmap_aliases() loops through all vbs. However,
since commit 062eacf57ad9 ("mm: vmalloc: remove a global vmap_blocks
xarray") the vb from xarray may not be on the corresponding CPU
vmap_block_queue. Consequently, purge_fragmented_block() might use the
wrong vbq->lock to protect the free list, leading to vbq->free breakage.
Incorrect lock protection can exhaust all vmalloc space as follows:
CPU0 CPU1
+--------------------------------------------+
| +--------------------+ +-----+ |
+--> | |---->| |------+
| CPU1:vbq free_list | | vb1 |
+--- | |<----| |<-----+
| +--------------------+ +-----+ |
+--------------------------------------------+
_vm_unmap_aliases() vb_alloc()
new_vmap_block()
xa_for_each(&vbq->vmap_blocks, idx, vb)
--> vb in CPU1:vbq->freelist
purge_fragmented_block(vb)
spin_lock(&vbq->lock) spin_lock(&vbq->lock)
--> use CPU0:vbq->lock --> use CPU1:vbq->lock
list_del_rcu(&vb->free_list) list_add_tail_rcu(&vb->free_list, &vbq->free)
__list_del(vb->prev, vb->next)
next->prev = prev
+--------------------+
| |
| CPU1:vbq free_list |
+---| |<--+
| +--------------------+ |
+----------------------------+
__list_add(new, head->prev, head)
+--------------------------------------------+
| +--------------------+ +-----+ |
+--> | |---->| |------+
| CPU1:vbq free_list | | vb2 |
+--- | |<----| |<-----+
| +--------------------+ +-----+ |
+--------------------------------------------+
prev->next = next
+--------------------------------------------+
|----------------------------+ |
| +--------------------+ | +-----+ |
+--> | |--+ | |------+
| CPU1:vbq free_list | | vb2 |
+--- | |<----| |<-----+
| +--------------------+ +-----+ |
+--------------------------------------------+
Here’s a list breakdown. All vbs, which were to be added to
‘prev’, cannot be used by list_for_each_entry_rcu(vb, &vbq->free,
free_list) in vb_alloc(). Thus, vmalloc space is exhausted.
This issue affects both erofs and f2fs, the stacktrace is as follows:
erofs:
[<ffffffd4ffb93ad4>] __switch_to+0x174
[<ffffffd4ffb942f0>] __schedule+0x624
[<ffffffd4ffb946f4>] schedule+0x7c
[<ffffffd4ffb947cc>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x24
[<ffffffd4ffb962ec>] __mutex_lock+0x374
[<ffffffd4ffb95998>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x14
[<ffffffd4ffb95954>] mutex_lock+0x24
[<ffffffd4fef2900c>] reclaim_and_purge_vmap_areas+0x44
[<ffffffd4fef25908>] alloc_vmap_area+0x2e0
[<ffffffd4fef24ea0>] vm_map_ram+0x1b0
[<ffffffd4ff1b46f4>] z_erofs_lz4_decompress+0x278
[<ffffffd4ff1b8ac4>] z_erofs_decompress_queue+0x650
[<ffffffd4ff1b8328>] z_erofs_runqueue+0x7f4
[<ffffffd4ff1b66a8>] z_erofs_read_folio+0x104
[<ffffffd4feeb6fec>] filemap_read_folio+0x6c
[<ffffffd4feeb68c4>] filemap_fault+0x300
[<ffffffd4fef0ecac>] __do_fault+0xc8
[<ffffffd4fef0c908>] handle_mm_fault+0xb38
[<ffffffd4ffb9f008>] do_page_fault+0x288
[<ffffffd4ffb9ed64>] do_translation_fault[jt]+0x40
[<ffffffd4fec39c78>] do_mem_abort+0x58
[<ffffffd4ffb8c3e4>] el0_ia+0x70
[<ffffffd4ffb8c260>] el0t_64_sync_handler[jt]+0xb0
[<ffffffd4fec11588>] ret_to_user[jt]+0x0
f2fs:
[<ffffffd4ffb93ad4>] __switch_to+0x174
[<ffffffd4ffb942f0>] __schedule+0x624
[<ffffffd4ffb946f4>] schedule+0x7c
[<ffffffd4ffb947cc>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x24
[<ffffffd4ffb962ec>] __mutex_lock+0x374
[<ffffffd4ffb95998>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x14
[<ffffffd4ffb95954>] mutex_lock+0x24
[<ffffffd4fef2900c>] reclaim_and_purge_vmap_areas+0x44
[<ffffffd4fef25908>] alloc_vmap_area+0x2e0
[<ffffffd4fef24ea0>] vm_map_ram+0x1b0
[<ffffffd4ff1a3b60>] f2fs_prepare_decomp_mem+0x144
[<ffffffd4ff1a6c24>] f2fs_alloc_dic+0x264
[<ffffffd4ff175468>] f2fs_read_multi_pages+0x428
[<ffffffd4ff17b46c>] f2fs_mpage_readpages+0x314
[<ffffffd4ff1785c4>] f2fs_readahead+0x50
[<ffffffd4feec3384>] read_pages+0x80
[<ffffffd4feec32c0>] page_cache_ra_unbounded+0x1a0
[<ffffffd4feec39e8>] page_cache_ra_order+0x274
[<ffffffd4feeb6cec>] do_sync_mmap_readahead+0x11c
[<ffffffd4feeb6764>] filemap_fault+0x1a0
[<ffffffd4ff1423bc>] f2fs_filemap_fault+0x28
[<ffffffd4fef0ecac>] __do_fault+0xc8
[<ffffffd4fef0c908>] handle_mm_fault+0xb38
[<ffffffd4ffb9f008>] do_page_fault+0x288
[<ffffffd4ffb9ed64>] do_translation_fault[jt]+0x40
[<ffffffd4fec39c78>] do_mem_abort+0x58
[<ffffffd4ffb8c3e4>] el0_ia+0x70
[<ffffffd4ffb8c260>] el0t_64_sync_handler[jt]+0xb0
[<ffffffd4fec11588>] ret_to_user[jt]+0x0
To fix this, introducee cpu within vmap_block to record which this vb
belongs to.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240614021352.1822225-1-zhaoyang.huang@xxxxxxxxxx
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240607023116.1720640-1-zhaoyang.huang@xxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: fc1e0d980037 ("mm/vmalloc: prevent stale TLBs in fully utilized blocks")
Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Hailong.Liu <hailong.liu@xxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -1939,6 +1939,7 @@ struct vmap_block {
struct list_head free_list;
struct rcu_head rcu_head;
struct list_head purge;
+ unsigned int cpu;
};
/* Queue of free and dirty vmap blocks, for allocation and flushing purposes */
@@ -2066,8 +2067,15 @@ static void *new_vmap_block(unsigned int
free_vmap_area(va);
return ERR_PTR(err);
}
-
- vbq = raw_cpu_ptr(&vmap_block_queue);
+ /*
+ * list_add_tail_rcu could happened in another core
+ * rather than vb->cpu due to task migration, which
+ * is safe as list_add_tail_rcu will ensure the list's
+ * integrity together with list_for_each_rcu from read
+ * side.
+ */
+ vb->cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
+ vbq = per_cpu_ptr(&vmap_block_queue, vb->cpu);
spin_lock(&vbq->lock);
list_add_tail_rcu(&vb->free_list, &vbq->free);
spin_unlock(&vbq->lock);
@@ -2093,9 +2101,10 @@ static void free_vmap_block(struct vmap_
}
static bool purge_fragmented_block(struct vmap_block *vb,
- struct vmap_block_queue *vbq, struct list_head *purge_list,
- bool force_purge)
+ struct list_head *purge_list, bool force_purge)
{
+ struct vmap_block_queue *vbq = &per_cpu(vmap_block_queue, vb->cpu);
+
if (vb->free + vb->dirty != VMAP_BBMAP_BITS ||
vb->dirty == VMAP_BBMAP_BITS)
return false;
@@ -2143,7 +2152,7 @@ static void purge_fragmented_blocks(int
continue;
spin_lock(&vb->lock);
- purge_fragmented_block(vb, vbq, &purge, true);
+ purge_fragmented_block(vb, &purge, true);
spin_unlock(&vb->lock);
}
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -2280,7 +2289,7 @@ static void _vm_unmap_aliases(unsigned l
* not purgeable, check whether there is dirty
* space to be flushed.
*/
- if (!purge_fragmented_block(vb, vbq, &purge_list, false) &&
+ if (!purge_fragmented_block(vb, &purge_list, false) &&
vb->dirty_max && vb->dirty != VMAP_BBMAP_BITS) {
unsigned long va_start = vb->va->va_start;
unsigned long s, e;
