From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754173AbcBGPqx (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2016 10:46:53 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:33437 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753902AbcBGPqv (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2016 10:46:51 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 07:46:48 -0800 From: Jeremiah Mahler To: Konstantin Khlebnikov Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Matthew Wilcox , Hugh Dickins , Mel Gorman , Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] mm: filemap_map_pages NULL pointer dereference Message-ID: <20160207154648.GA15990@hudson.localdomain> Mail-Followup-To: Jeremiah Mahler , Konstantin Khlebnikov , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Matthew Wilcox , Hugh Dickins , Mel Gorman , Stephen Rothwell References: <20160205180502.GA5869@hudson.localdomain> <20160205141940.ecc0110b00347a264c868c43@linux-foundation.org> <20160206181856.GA7465@hudson.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Konstantin, On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:27:53AM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Jeremiah Mahler wrote: [...] > >> -static __always_inline unsigned > >> +static __always_inline long > >> radix_tree_chunk_size(struct radix_tree_iter *iter) > >> { > >> return iter->next_index - iter->index; > >> @@ -434,9 +434,9 @@ radix_tree_next_slot(void **slot, struct > >> return slot + offset + 1; > >> } > >> } else { > >> - unsigned size = radix_tree_chunk_size(iter) - 1; > >> + long size = radix_tree_chunk_size(iter); > >> > >> - while (size--) { > >> + while (--size > 0) { > >> slot++; > >> iter->index++; > >> if (likely(*slot)) > >> _ > >> > > > > I have applied this patch to my kernel and so far the bug has not > > come back. Thanks for the quick fix. > > > > Although I don't quite understand how this fixes the slot==NULL problem. > > Unless I am missing something, it looks like the while loop will be > > executed the same number of times but the size variable will no > > longer go negative as it did before. > > That's simple. Slot is dereferenced after checking remaining size. > Old version checked only for != 0. After iter-retry size is zero and > afrer "- 1" it overlaps into positive range. In new version it's signed and > checked for > 0. > OK, I get it now. Thanks for the explanation. -- - Jeremiah Mahler