Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-146230-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 05:35:50 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@gmail.com>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+ad1b592fc4483655438b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
	syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [mm?] KASAN: slab-use-after-free Read in
 __vma_reservation_common
Message-ID: <Zh4AJiHFQBkD1J_F@casper.infradead.org>
References: <000000000000daf1e10615e64dcb@google.com>
 <000000000000ae5d410615fea3bf@google.com>
 <Zh2kuFX9BWOGN1Mo@fedora>
 <Zh2m5_MfZ45Uk-vD@casper.infradead.org>
 <CAOzc2pzFSkwo21Uba3ys5u8=okYbtA2ptyc5bQJwHoS=H_UMtA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAOzc2pzFSkwo21Uba3ys5u8=okYbtA2ptyc5bQJwHoS=H_UMtA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 04:02:48PM -0700, Vishal Moola wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 3:15 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 03:05:44PM -0700, Vishal Moola wrote:
> > > Commit 9acad7ba3e25 ("hugetlb: use vmf_anon_prepare() instead of
> > > anon_vma_prepare()") may bailout after allocating a folio if we do not
> > > hold the mmap lock. When this occurs, vmf_anon_prepare() will release the
> > > vma lock. Hugetlb then attempts to call restore_reserve_on_error(),
> > > which depends on the vma lock being held.
> > >
> > > We can move vmf_anon_prepare() prior to the folio allocation in order to
> > > avoid calling restore_reserve_on_error() without the vma lock.
> >
> > But now you're calling vmf_anon_prepare() in the wrong place -- before
> > we've determined that we need an anon folio.  So we'll create an
> > anon_vma even when we don't need one for this vma.
> 
> That's true. Though that can be addressed through something like:
> 
> if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_MAYSHARE)) {
>                        ret = vmf_anon_prepare(vmf);
>                        if (unlikely(ret))
>                                goto out;
> }

Why does hugetlbfs use VM_MAYSHARE while regular faults use VM_SHARED?