From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Matt Salsamendi <matthewsalsamendi@gmail.com>
Cc: "Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>,
Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc/task_mmu: fix stale walk_end after a completed scan
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 17:05:30 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261112170530.ccddc60994db414a3177a066@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMPWk9NE_epOdOCbs1PGh8OQP4wjTObvjU-1Wopmu7SSNAMXhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 12 Nov 2026 12:41:02 -0500 Matt Salsamendi <matthewsalsamendi@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Matthew Salsamendi <matthewsalsamendi@gmail.com>
>
> After PAGEMAP_SCAN fills its internal buffer, a successful final walk can
> leave walk_end at the earlier stopping point. On x86-64, 513 disjoint
> written pages return 513 ranges with the last range beyond walk_end.
> This trips a bounds assertion in a userspace dirty-page tracker.
>
> Update walk_end on successful completion before replacing ret with the
> range count. Preserve the stopping address for partial scans.
Bug seems real, thanks.
> Fixes: 52526ca7fdb9 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: implement IOCTL to get and
> optionally clear info about PTEs")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
This should be justified, please. Hopefully full and clear
justification for backports will soon be required.
https://lore.kernel.org/20261111171055.527b4bf3da705367bc78a64c@linux-foundation.org
and followups explain this.
> Validated on x86-64 v7.4-rc2 in KVM: all 12 scan cases and all 119
> pagemap_ioctl selftests pass. The unpatched kernel reproduces the bug.
Thing is, those 119 test already pass. And the mysterious 12 scan
cases are undisclosed.
So.
Please prepare a selftests patch to catch this bug [1] then confirm
that the altered selftests fail before the proposed patch and pass after
it. Then present both as a two-patch series.
Thanks.
[1] my thing suggested the below. I haven't run it.
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/pagemap_ioctl.c~selftests-mm-pagemap_ioctl-check-walk_end-after-buffer-refill
+++ a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/pagemap_ioctl.c
@@ -1476,6 +1476,51 @@ static void *thread_proc(void *mem)
if (getrusage(RUSAGE_THREAD, &r))
ksft_exit_fail_msg("getrusage\n");
+static void test_walk_end_after_refill(void)
+{
+ const int nr_ranges = 513;
+ const int nr_pages = nr_ranges * 2;
+ const int len = nr_pages * page_size;
+ struct page_region *vec;
+ char *mem;
+ long walk_end = 0;
+ long ret;
+ int i;
+ bool ok;
+
+ mem = mmap(NULL, len, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
+ MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
+ if (mem == MAP_FAILED)
+ ksft_exit_fail_msg("mmap failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
+ if (madvise(mem, len, MADV_NOHUGEPAGE))
+ ksft_exit_fail_msg("MADV_NOHUGEPAGE failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
+ vec = calloc(nr_ranges, sizeof(*vec));
+ if (!vec)
+ ksft_exit_fail_msg("calloc failed\n");
+
+ wp_init(mem, len);
+ wp_addr_range(mem, len);
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_ranges; i++)
+ mem[2 * i * page_size] = 1;
+
+ ret = pagemap_ioc(mem, len, vec, nr_ranges, 0, 0,
+ PAGE_IS_WRITTEN, 0, 0, PAGE_IS_WRITTEN, &walk_end);
+ ok = ret == nr_ranges && walk_end == (long)(mem + len);
+ if (ret == nr_ranges) {
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_ranges; i++) {
+ if (vec[i].start != (uintptr_t)(mem + 2 * i * page_size) ||
+ vec[i].end != (uintptr_t)(mem + (2 * i + 1) * page_size)) {
+ ok = false;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ ksft_test_result(ok, "PAGEMAP_SCAN walk_end after bounce buffer refill\n");
+ wp_free(mem, len);
+ munmap(mem, len);
+ free(vec);
+}
+
faults = r.ru_minflt - curr_faults;
if (faults < access_per_thread)
ksft_exit_fail_msg("faults < access_per_thread");
@@ -1661,12 +1706,14 @@ int main(int __attribute__((unused)) arg
if (!hugetlb_setup_default(4))
ksft_print_msg("HugeTLB test will be skipped\n");
- ksft_set_plan(119);
+ ksft_set_plan(120);
pagemap_fd = open(PAGEMAP, O_RDONLY);
if (pagemap_fd < 0)
ksft_exit_fail_msg("Failed to open " PAGEMAP "\n");
+ test_walk_end_after_refill();
+
/* 1. Sanity testing */
sanity_tests_sd();
_
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-13 1:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-12 17:41 Matt Salsamendi
2026-11-13 1:05 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261112170530.ccddc60994db414a3177a066@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=matthewsalsamendi@gmail.com \
--cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
--cc=usama.anjum@arm.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®