Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 8 Apr 2020 11:24:35 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        syzbot+693dc11fcb53120b5559@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/mempolicy: Allow lookup_node() to handle fatal
 signal
Message-ID: <20200408152435.GH66033@xz-x1>
References: <20200408014010.80428-1-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20200408014010.80428-2-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20200408102128.GX18914@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200408142039.GD66033@xz-x1>
 <20200408143024.GZ18914@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200408143024.GZ18914@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 04:30:24PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 08-04-20 10:20:39, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 12:21:28PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 07-04-20 21:40:09, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > lookup_node() uses gup to pin the page and get node information.  It
> > > > checks against ret>=0 assuming the page will be filled in.  However
> > > > it's also possible that gup will return zero, for example, when the
> > > > thread is quickly killed with a fatal signal.  Teach lookup_node() to
> > > > gracefully return an error -EFAULT if it happens.
> > > > 
> > > > Meanwhile, initialize "page" to NULL to avoid potential risk of
> > > > exploiting the pointer.
> > > > 
> > > > Reported-by: syzbot+693dc11fcb53120b5559@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > Fixes: 4426e945df58 ("mm/gup: allow VM_FAULT_RETRY for multiple times")
> > > 
> > > I am not familiar with thic commit but shouldn't gup return ERESTARTSYS
> > > on a fatal signal?
> > 
> > Hi, Michal,
> > 
> > I do see quite a few usages on -ERESTARTSYS, but also some others,
> > majorly -EINTR, or even -EFAULT.  I think it could be a more general
> > question rather than a specific question to this patch only.
> 
> I am sorry but I was probably not clear enough. I was mostly worried
> that gup doesn't return ERESTARTSYS or EINTR when it backed off because
> of fatal signal pending. Your patch is checking for 0 an indicating that
> this is that condition.

Yeah I just noticed the fact, sorry!

Hillf just posted a fix there for recovering the behavior:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200408151213.GE66033@xz-x1/

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu