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;
Message-ID: <e681b84a-21cd-28de-754d-0eb30a764343@quicinc.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 18:02:34 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix use-after free of page_ext after race with
 memory-offline
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
CC:     <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>, <sjpark@amazon.de>,
        <sieberf@amazon.com>, <shakeelb@google.com>, <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        <willy@infradead.org>, <mhocko@suse.com>, <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        <david@redhat.com>, <minchan@kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>
References: <1657810063-28938-1-git-send-email-quic_charante@quicinc.com>
 <20220714180418.6d546650b3e5ae745f09814d@linux-foundation.org>
From:   Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220714180418.6d546650b3e5ae745f09814d@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Thanks Andrew for the review!!

On 7/15/2022 6:34 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:17:43 +0530 Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@quicinc.com> wrote:
> 
>> The below is one path where race between page_ext and  offline of the
>> respective memory blocks will cause use-after-free on the access of
>> page_ext structure.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/include/linux/page_ext.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/page_ext.h
>> @@ -64,6 +64,25 @@ static inline struct page_ext *page_ext_next(struct page_ext *curr)
>>  	return next;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline struct page_ext *get_page_ext(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +	struct page_ext *page_ext;
>> +
>> +	rcu_read_lock();
> If page_ext.h is to call rcu functions then it will need to include
> appropriate header files.
> 

Will add them!!

>> +	page_ext = lookup_page_ext(page);
>> +	if (!page_ext) {
>> +		rcu_read_unlock();
>> +		return NULL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return page_ext;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void put_page_ext(void)
>> +{
>> +	rcu_read_unlock();
>> +}
> Better names would be page_ext_get() and page_ext_put().  The rest of
> the page_ext API appears to have got this right, so let's not mess that
> up.

I see naming convention is not consistent in page_ext.c. For couple of
them I see page_ext_xxx() and for the rest it is xxx_page_ext(). Sure I
will follow the page_ext_xxx() convention in V2.

> 
> Also, these aren't really get and put functions - page_ext doesn't have
> a refcount.  But I can't immediately think of a name that better
> communicates what we're doing here so I guess get and put will do.
>> And are we able to add some comments here explaining why these
> functions exist and what they do?

Sure will add then in V2.
> 
>>  #else /* !CONFIG_PAGE_EXTENSION */
>>  struct page_ext;
> Are you sure we didn't need CONFIG_PAGE_EXTENSION=n stubs for these two
> functions?

I think it does need. Will add them in v2.

> 
>