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;
Feedback-ID: i787e41f1:Fastmail
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:27:44 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>, lstoakes@gmail.com,
        regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
        Fabian Vogt <fvogt@suse.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for v6.3 regression] mm/mremap: fix vm_pgoff in
 vma_merge() case 3
Message-ID: <2023042719-stratus-pavestone-505e@gregkh>
References: <20230427140959.27655-1-vbabka@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230427140959.27655-1-vbabka@suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 04:09:59PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> After upgrading build guests to v6.3, rpm started segfaulting for
> specific packages, which was bisected to commit 0503ea8f5ba7 ("mm/mmap:
> remove __vma_adjust()"). rpm is doing many mremap() operations with file
> mappings of its db. The problem is that in vma_merge() case 3 (we merge
> with the next vma, expanding it downwards) vm_pgoff is not adjusted as
> it should when vm_start changes. As a result the rpm process most likely
> sees data from the wrong offset of the file. Fix the vm_pgoff
> calculation.
> 
> For case 8 this is a non-functional change as the resulting vm_pgoff is
> the same.
> 
> Reported-and-bisected-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>
> Reported-and-tested-by: Fabian Vogt <fvogt@suse.com>
> Link: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1210903
> Fixes: 0503ea8f5ba7 ("mm/mmap: remove __vma_adjust()")
> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> Hi, I'm sending this patch on top of v6.3 as I think it should be
> applied and backported to 6.3-stable rather sooner than later.
> This means there would be a small conflict when merging mm/mm-stable
> later. Alternatively it could be added to mm/mm-stable and upcoming 6.4
> pull request, but then the stable backport would need adjustment.
> It's up to Linus and Andrew.

That's not how the stable tree works, sorry, it needs to be in Linus's
tree _first_.

thanks,

greg k-h