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;
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 17:46:37 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shmem: Update folio if shmem_replace_page() updates the
 page
Message-Id: <20220802174637.3bd3478d137b52ef3b67c3b3@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220730042518.1264767-1-willy@infradead.org>
References: <20220730042518.1264767-1-willy@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 05:25:18 +0100 "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> If we allocate a new page, we need to make sure that our folio matches
> that new page.  This will be solved by changing shmem_replace_page()
> to shmem_replace_folio(), but this is the minimal fix.
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/shmem.c
> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
> @@ -1771,6 +1771,7 @@ static int shmem_swapin_folio(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index,
>  
>  	if (shmem_should_replace_folio(folio, gfp)) {
>  		error = shmem_replace_page(&page, gfp, info, index);
> +		folio = page_folio(page);
>  		if (error)
>  			goto failed;
>  	}

What are the user-visible runtime effects of the bug?

Should we backport this into 5.19.X?