From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Guixiong Wei <weiguixiong@bytedance.com>, x86@kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Chang S . Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: Free dynamic fpstate on exec()
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 08:57:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <92104265-aaa2-4594-aea0-29fd1841157e@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260929151013.81562-2-weiguixiong@bytedance.com>
On 9/29/26 08:10, Guixiong Wei wrote:
> Make fpstate_free() operate on the fpstate pointer itself so it can
> free the detached allocation. Use it for the existing reallocation
> and task release paths as well.
I had to stare at this for a moment to get what was going on. This is
trying to say something like:
fpstate_free() only frees the fpstate currently associated with
a 'struct fpu'. It is unable to free an fpstate that has been
detached from the fpu, such as after a reset.
> On an AMX-capable system, 1000 iterations of requesting XTILEDATA
> permission, executing TILEZERO and calling execve() on the same image
> left 1000 16 KiB allocations attributed to __xfd_enable_feature() in
> /proc/vmallocinfo. None remained after this change.
I really value being succinct in these changelogs. Both the subject and
the changelog don't really get to the point. Shouldn't this be:
x86/fpu: Fix memory leak with dynamic fpstate and exec()
?
In the changelog, shouldn't it say "leak" somewhere?
> void fpu_flush_thread(void)
> {
> - fpstate_reset(x86_task_fpu(current));
> + struct fpu *fpu = x86_task_fpu(current);
> + struct fpstate *oldfpstate = fpu->fpstate;
> +
> + fpstate_reset(fpu);
> fpu_reset_fpstate_regs();
> +
> + /*
> + * Free the old state only after register state ownership has been
> + * invalidated. Otherwise, a context switch could save into it.
> + */
> + fpstate_free(oldfpstate);
> }
I'm not sure I like where this lands.
The problem with the code now is that it expects it is always OK to call
fpstate_reset(). In fact, it is dangerous to call fpstate_reset() on any
fpu that has dynamic state allocated because it will be leaked.
The patch fixes one of the call sites of fpstate_reset() but didn't make
fpstate_reset() itself any safer.
Wouldn't this be simpler and more foolproof against new users?
void fpstate_reset(struct fpu *fpu)
{
+ /* Free dynamic fpstate (if any) before resetting pointer: */
+ fpstate_free(fpu);
/* Set the fpstate pointer to the default fpstate */
fpu->fpstate = &fpu->__fpstate;
__fpstate_reset(fpu->fpstate);
It will mean one more change in fpu_clone(), but I think that's OK:
int fpu_clone(struct task_struct *dst, u64 clone_flags, bool minimal,
unsigned long ssp)
{
/* The new task's FPU state cannot be valid in the hardware. */
dst_fpu->last_cpu = -1;
+ /* Break the link to the other FPU's fpstate: */
+ dst_fpu->fpstate = NULL;
fpstate_reset(dst_fpu);
I'd much rather special case clone() than the other paths.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-29 15:10 Guixiong Wei
2026-09-29 15:57 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2026-09-29 16:53 ` Dave Hansen
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=92104265-aaa2-4594-aea0-29fd1841157e@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=weiguixiong@bytedance.com \
--cc=x86@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®