Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+353be47c9ce21b68b7ed@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
        dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        jeremy.linton@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu,
        syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING in memtype_reserve
In-Reply-To: <20200509074507.GC1831917@kroah.com>
References: <000000000000f0d8d205a531f1a3@google.com> <20200509074507.GC1831917@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 09 May 2020 12:00:57 +0200
Message-ID: <87wo5l4ecm.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 12:20:14AM -0700, syzbot wrote:
>> memtype_reserve failed: [mem 0xffffffffff000-0x00008fff], req write-back
>> WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 7025 at arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c:589 memtype_reserve+0x69f/0x820 arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c:589
>
> So should memtype_reserve() not do a WARN if given invalid parameters as
> it can be triggered by userspace requests?
>
> A normal "invalid request" debug line is probably all that is needed,
> right?

I disagree. The callsite espcially if user space triggerable should not
attempt to ask for a reservation where start > end:

  >> memtype_reserve failed: [mem 0xffffffffff000-0x00008fff], req write-back

The real question is which part of the call chain is responsible for
this. That needs to be fixed.

Thanks,

        tglx