Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000000000000cabcb505dae9e577@google.com> <CAHk-=wjLL3OB8PvFGBLgUs=zip-Q2m1P=UwG+Pw_E8nYDs+MUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZfGtW0tN+xYSGGVmxjosTuoRR-mETaNTFNFZu7WuPW2JL9JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgW1hEUaQeX41+3w7AGsXkeE1XOXCMndXs3kFp-XjSVzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZfGtVRWKhAf-fNWcLQgjb0zBZHX3bQ+aYywfiRsapoLacq3g@mail.gmail.com> <CACT4Y+aQOziG8LGiTdyjTTHXJ4tNy2qxJ4yTPy-aUBG9CQB3_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+aQOziG8LGiTdyjTTHXJ4tNy2qxJ4yTPy-aUBG9CQB3_w@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:12:26 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtUr6V5pTrPhZukD2_KbB7BLPoKvF6H63HP4pykY36Ou9A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] general protection fault in list_lru_add
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+f8c45ccc7d5d45fc5965@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 4:50 PM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 09:44, Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:05 AM Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 7:19 PM Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > After this commit, the rules of dentry allocations changed.
> > > > The dentry should be allocated by kmem_cache_alloc_lru()
> > >
> > > Yeah, I looked at that, but I can't find any way there could be other
> > > allocations - not only are there strict rules how to initialize
> > > everything, but the dentries are free'd using
> > >
> > >         kmem_cache_free(dentry_cache, dentry);
> > >
> > > and as a result if they were allocated any other way I would expect
> > > things would go south very quickly.
> > >
> > > The only other thing I could come up with is some breakage in the
> > > superblock lifetime so that &dentry->d_sb->s_dentry_lru would have
> > > problems, but again, this is *such* core code and not some unusual
> > > path, that I would be very very surprised if it wouldn't have
> > > triggered other issues long long ago.
> > >
> > > That's why I'd be more inclined to worry about the list_lru code being
> > > somehow broken.
> > >
> >
> > I also have the same concern.  I have been trying for a few hours to
> > reproduce this issue, but it didn't oops on my test machine.  And I'll
> > continue reproducing this.
>
> syzbot triggered it 222 times in a day, so it's most likely real:
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=f8c45ccc7d5d45fc5965
>
> There are 2 reproducers, but they look completely different. May be a race.
> You may also try to use syzbot's patch testing feature to get some
> additional debug info.

Do you know how to tell the syzbot to test the following patch?
I found some infos from github, it says "#syz test:", is it like the following?
Thanks.

#syz test: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
master

diff --git a/mm/list_lru.c b/mm/list_lru.c
index c669d87001a6..ddb2ee627d32 100644
--- a/mm/list_lru.c
+++ b/mm/list_lru.c
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ list_lru_from_kmem(struct list_lru *lru, int nid, void *ptr,
        struct list_lru_node *nlru = &lru->node[nid];
        struct list_lru_one *l = &nlru->lru;
        struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
+       int kmemcg_id;

        if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
                goto out;
@@ -75,7 +76,13 @@ list_lru_from_kmem(struct list_lru *lru, int nid, void *ptr,
        if (!memcg)
                goto out;

-       l = list_lru_from_memcg_idx(lru, nid, memcg_kmem_id(memcg));
+       kmemcg_id = memcg_kmem_id(memcg);
+       l = list_lru_from_memcg_idx(lru, nid, kmemcg_id);
+       if (!l) {
+               pr_info("BUG: the memcg(%px)->objcg(%px), kmemcg_id: %d\n",
+                       memcg, memcg->objcg, kmemcg_id);
+               BUG();
+       }
 out:
        if (memcg_ptr)
                *memcg_ptr = memcg;