I found it by pure code review, that pte_same_as_swp() of unuse_vma() didn't
take uffd-wp bit into account when comparing ptes. pte_same_as_swp() returning
false negative could cause failure to swapoff swap ptes that was wr-protected
by userfaultfd.
Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <[email protected]>
---
include/linux/swapops.h | 15 +++++++++++----
mm/swapfile.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/swapops.h b/include/linux/swapops.h
index af3d2661e41e..d356ab4047f7 100644
--- a/include/linux/swapops.h
+++ b/include/linux/swapops.h
@@ -23,6 +23,16 @@
#define SWP_TYPE_SHIFT (BITS_PER_XA_VALUE - MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT)
#define SWP_OFFSET_MASK ((1UL << SWP_TYPE_SHIFT) - 1)
+/* Clear all flags but only keep swp_entry_t related information */
+static inline pte_t pte_swp_clear_flags(pte_t pte)
+{
+ if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte))
+ pte = pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte);
+ if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(pte))
+ pte = pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(pte);
+ return pte;
+}
+
/*
* Store a type+offset into a swp_entry_t in an arch-independent format
*/
@@ -66,10 +76,7 @@ static inline swp_entry_t pte_to_swp_entry(pte_t pte)
{
swp_entry_t arch_entry;
- if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte))
- pte = pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte);
- if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(pte))
- pte = pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(pte);
+ pte = pte_swp_clear_flags(pte);
arch_entry = __pte_to_swp_entry(pte);
return swp_entry(__swp_type(arch_entry), __swp_offset(arch_entry));
}
diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c
index 6212bc033602..1e07d1c776f2 100644
--- a/mm/swapfile.c
+++ b/mm/swapfile.c
@@ -1887,7 +1887,7 @@ unsigned int count_swap_pages(int type, int free)
static inline int pte_same_as_swp(pte_t pte, pte_t swp_pte)
{
- return pte_same(pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte), swp_pte);
+ return pte_same(pte_swp_clear_flags(pte), swp_pte);
}
/*
--
2.31.1
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021, Peter Xu wrote:
> I found it by pure code review, that pte_same_as_swp() of unuse_vma() didn't
Yes, that is an odd corner, easily missed.
> take uffd-wp bit into account when comparing ptes. pte_same_as_swp() returning
> false negative could cause failure to swapoff swap ptes that was wr-protected
> by userfaultfd.
>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <[email protected]>
I expect you're right: swapoff used to hang forever (but interruptibly)
when this went wrong on powerpc originally. I don't know the uffd_wp
(nor the soft_dirty) end of it, but treating uffd_wp and soft_dirty
together looks a very good approach, so I'll venture an
Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
But I think it should have a uffd_wp Fixes tag and be Cc stable.
> ---
> include/linux/swapops.h | 15 +++++++++++----
> mm/swapfile.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/swapops.h b/include/linux/swapops.h
> index af3d2661e41e..d356ab4047f7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/swapops.h
> +++ b/include/linux/swapops.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,16 @@
> #define SWP_TYPE_SHIFT (BITS_PER_XA_VALUE - MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT)
> #define SWP_OFFSET_MASK ((1UL << SWP_TYPE_SHIFT) - 1)
>
> +/* Clear all flags but only keep swp_entry_t related information */
> +static inline pte_t pte_swp_clear_flags(pte_t pte)
> +{
> + if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte))
> + pte = pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte);
> + if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(pte))
> + pte = pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(pte);
> + return pte;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Store a type+offset into a swp_entry_t in an arch-independent format
> */
> @@ -66,10 +76,7 @@ static inline swp_entry_t pte_to_swp_entry(pte_t pte)
> {
> swp_entry_t arch_entry;
>
> - if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte))
> - pte = pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte);
> - if (pte_swp_uffd_wp(pte))
> - pte = pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(pte);
> + pte = pte_swp_clear_flags(pte);
> arch_entry = __pte_to_swp_entry(pte);
> return swp_entry(__swp_type(arch_entry), __swp_offset(arch_entry));
> }
> diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c
> index 6212bc033602..1e07d1c776f2 100644
> --- a/mm/swapfile.c
> +++ b/mm/swapfile.c
> @@ -1887,7 +1887,7 @@ unsigned int count_swap_pages(int type, int free)
>
> static inline int pte_same_as_swp(pte_t pte, pte_t swp_pte)
> {
> - return pte_same(pte_swp_clear_soft_dirty(pte), swp_pte);
> + return pte_same(pte_swp_clear_flags(pte), swp_pte);
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 2.31.1
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 08:26:02PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2021, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > I found it by pure code review, that pte_same_as_swp() of unuse_vma() didn't
>
> Yes, that is an odd corner, easily missed.
>
> > take uffd-wp bit into account when comparing ptes. pte_same_as_swp() returning
> > false negative could cause failure to swapoff swap ptes that was wr-protected
> > by userfaultfd.
> >
> > Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <[email protected]>
>
> I expect you're right: swapoff used to hang forever (but interruptibly)
> when this went wrong on powerpc originally. I don't know the uffd_wp
> (nor the soft_dirty) end of it, but treating uffd_wp and soft_dirty
> together looks a very good approach, so I'll venture an
>
> Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
Thanks!
>
> But I think it should have a uffd_wp Fixes tag and be Cc stable.
Yes, should be:
Cc: [email protected] # v5.7+
Fixes: f45ec5ff16a7 ("userfaultfd: wp: support swap and page migration")
--
Peter Xu