From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f170.google.com (mail-pf1-f170.google.com [209.85.210.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 291E53191C9 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 16:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.170 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769619187; cv=none; b=QKA0t+Xywd3XwleQkmdj8xQZ3VFtuSP9+yre3jjuoE7EUFgHePVdBO+KEtdeoHl7NS7koSm/8SyF5LwCJnW67nhF/8h982ZkCb1W7urOeaUcjUVYRUm0+hBzeIC+ICxPAfUy00IKBbz+JMYE2Dc+NOBjVwSMxSZz97jIA3NPQkM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769619187; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rckFLLAm1SSfIECkf+mbm0qJyh8hohIZ16wsToU/d7g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=GS/qDx61q0APKyEB0ry8niA3Kf1IwzMqGNdPDwjML3JIpH1bwJs1r2CS8TqPM+KkCJpN7C9jXDrqdP4I8S5sNSQbv/fqgsxBFzase64ZtmIXCrAjbrP0/VoYXAlguF7UPy9x8YX1DD5d7swv3qEufEB37CcgtdGRPKx/NFUUo+8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=JuFsJGTe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.170 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="JuFsJGTe" Received: by mail-pf1-f170.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-82318702afbso20052b3a.1 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 08:53:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1769619185; x=1770223985; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+VIwZPYuTL84mdN01DfXHCnboBlP6LUsRJWXcsio5Wo=; b=JuFsJGTeaChw/ojU/qXfwiaQGeN5Su2beOCONeCc+s2KyA5UDFRwSoHgVjEcQk1UKp MvAc8wFHKkRcBThzUV3tz/n+vtd5lt/Qm0sXUAMEhXsBYF+gElJvbgk4wJbrwQ6ghQ4f 3bX7dwQQP9LyszqTZ6KBulk6pi++mkuvHlhIbJE6Fsuc1c6msn4moL15uS72rASpFihx 4TgC6yQ+6cDHihUIEgY5eYIwIxZVZ9hsFq+iXpayCbTFkcjjOYJmeRN2XFCETQjOIM1N SKC3lGpFuW7zKl7cNpyu6tUJHRPdE4fTyvj1GogZCWx3W1CzHEAIFG06F97p8zr+CEfH sdqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1769619185; x=1770223985; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+VIwZPYuTL84mdN01DfXHCnboBlP6LUsRJWXcsio5Wo=; b=LXnGrfbWXzTTL32TMwc80pdB1MeTW0LQ41FozKbGuyuU6HsayzrE10JTVhOwgpDJFv u8FL/hVrilYTG3Z6UgFAUvejCvKZDpf3/NiuX+8/M8X/OerPjT3P0Z8KyA6e58WeoL5h vAX0PHwK7wd2tI3Um862p8DUZqvUbgw3Isc59ceqtYhohDnOzh6JtaCedYxQidRgHzrk sstPsLFiVD9p88MnYoXu/I4cSQw535Ck8CKvIHTnI1avLm5cU/D9Q93ol1P/x4E+30Nq 8G6C0cS7QmUJMWFgdx74QUtdLl0IE2YfxQNNul98k0+mW+Rwyriq7Pt4qdsnohXSQIqw EEIQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWVRvPk430kphZZwe8YJnLM0Hd07+suEKet0LOr1u2iPKs1wVoudeZJ9XQkj8BTUAPNaXE7sS7hlxLfZMk=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx9JcnJQl4DItDL48xrG6cAceDMmGLAA+Ej607rlnKQWpLsSRrk D0Bo1QOnNM7SeVDrrykYbUSz4IyxSPZqXVjy1HpDDI7mIKmvGSE1doHc X-Gm-Gg: AZuq6aJtMbbPL4XdkIvmHvOg2B5tZ+0rRw36k3+94iOe6nKzLe3al5fWFjyqMeLnzzX G0cGPPGvr+rJ4Y5JSpJTEIyCrwr193hd+Zt8O/66HUvRzPbPQ0+Ta8s4rZhQAvf0569nPow4lFw XM1KT90wUJrLc5jKpS8pI2+LfDDL8YO+UH8n+SKzYWnUd8kwLIF6d6hefbyN8Yy8zT5cEERMH41 yu137LqKVXx3zYa5chif+mCOwVe4N+v1BR6hzLRO6f+9B0g34Or1ZLKbDWH0r/6kHtMjXyLKpCk iaBWaSH+JXygtTxR/cHoXporoIsXZ8+GOufIn54ABj4BWL5ghhf9wYOlbGJXAqpV/Y6OQo32m8Q hC1iq49JloQMlw1hRI3TsBPE3tTjSFoyrfJJ6KRLloSprkHGeh6jt+B1UUWsNI6Lt/1g7D+g31O I66R5nsvVbEvlBv0BZaoYZmmrzAyRCRxiJ1VtbRe3JA+oXja0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:4fcc:b0:7aa:4f1d:c458 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-823691849afmr5864355b3a.19.1769619185349; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 08:53:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from KASONG-MC4 ([101.32.222.185]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-82379b1f188sm3546757b3a.13.2026.01.28.08.53.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Jan 2026 08:53:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:52:59 +0800 From: Kairui Song To: Chris Mason , linux-mm@kvack.org, Baolin Wang Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Hugh Dickins , Baolin Wang , Andrew Morton , Kemeng Shi , Nhat Pham , Chris Li , Baoquan He , Barry Song , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kairui Song , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/shmem, swap: fix race of truncate and swap entry split Message-ID: References: <20260120-shmem-swap-fix-v3-1-3d33ebfbc057@tencent.com> <20260128130336.727049-1-clm@meta.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260128130336.727049-1-clm@meta.com> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 05:02:34AM +0800, Chris Mason wrote: > > > diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c > > --- a/mm/shmem.c > > +++ b/mm/shmem.c > > [ ... ] > > > @@ -1191,12 +1203,23 @@ > > folio = fbatch.folios[i]; > > > > if (xa_is_value(folio)) { > > + int order; > > long swaps_freed; > > > > if (unfalloc) > > continue; > > - swaps_freed = shmem_free_swap(mapping, indices[i], folio); > > + swaps_freed = shmem_free_swap(mapping, indices[i], > > + end - 1, folio); > > if (!swaps_freed) { > > + /* > > + * If found a large swap entry cross the end border, > > + * skip it as the truncate_inode_partial_folio above > > + * should have at least zerod its content once. > > + */ > > + order = shmem_confirm_swap(mapping, indices[i], > > + radix_to_swp_entry(folio)); > > + if (order > 0 && indices[i] + (1 << order) > end) > > + continue; > > /* Swap was replaced by page: retry */ > > index = indices[i]; > > break; > > Could this code infinite loop if a large swap entry crosses the START > boundary instead of the END boundary? Thanks for the review! It's really helpful :) > When shmem_free_swap() returns 0, it could be either because: > (a) The entry was replaced by a page, or > (b) The entry failed the boundary check (base < index || > base + nr_pages - 1 > end) > > The boundary check here only handles case (b) for entries crossing the > END boundary: > > if (order > 0 && indices[i] + (1 << order) > end) > continue; > > But what happens if the entry crosses the START boundary? If > find_get_entries() returns a large swap entry at indices[i] where > the entry's base (calculated as indices[i] & ~((1 << order) - 1)) is > less than the truncation start point, then shmem_free_swap() will > return 0 due to the "base < index" check. The code will then call > shmem_confirm_swap(), get the order, check if it crosses the END > boundary (which it doesn't), and retry with the same index: > > index = indices[i]; > break; > > The next iteration will find the same entry again at the same index, > leading to an infinite loop. For example: > > - Truncating range [18, 30] > - Large swap entry at [16, 23] (order 3, 8 pages) > - indices[i] = 18 > - shmem_free_swap() sees base=16 < index=18, returns 0 > - Check: 18 + 8 > 30 is false (26 <= 30) > - Retries with index=18 > - Loop repeats indefinitely I think this is a valid issue. And it's worse than that, during the `while (index < end)` loop a new large entry can land anywhere in the range, if one interaction's starting `index` points to the middle of any large entry, an infinite loop will occur: indices[0] are always equal to the `index` iteration value of that moments, shmem_free_swap will fail because the swap entry's index doesn't match indices[0], and so the `index = indices[i]; break;` keep it loop forever. The chance seems very low though. > Should the boundary check also handle the START case, perhaps: > > if (order > 0) { > pgoff_t base = indices[i] & ~((1UL << order) - 1); > if (base + (1 << order) - 1 > end || base < start) > continue; > } This still doesn't cover the case when a new large entry somehow lands in the range during the loop. > where 'start' is preserved from before the loop? How about following patch: >From 863f38c757ee0898b6b7f0f8c695f551a1380ce8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kairui Song Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:19:23 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] mm, shmem: prevent infinite loop on truncate race When truncating a large swap entry, shmem_free_swap() returns 0 when the entry's index doesn't match the given index due to lookup alignment. The failure fallback path checks if the entry crosses the end border and aborts when it happens, so truncate won't erase an unexpected entry or range. But one scenario was ignored. When `index` points to the middle of a large swap entry, and the large swap entry doesn't go across the end border, find_get_entries() will return that large swap entry as the first item in the batch with `indices[0]` equal to `index`. The entry's base index will be smaller than `indices[0]`, so shmem_free_swap() will fail and return 0 due to the "base < index" check. The code will then call shmem_confirm_swap(), get the order, check if it crosses the END boundary (which it doesn't), and retry with the same index. The next iteration will find the same entry again at the same index with same indices, leading to an infinite loop. Fix this by retrying with a round-down index, and abort if the index is smaller than the truncate range. Reported-by: Chris Mason Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260128130336.727049-1-clm@meta.com/ Fixes: 809bc86517cc ("mm: shmem: support large folio swap out") Fixes: 8a1968bd997f ("mm/shmem, swap: fix race of truncate and swap entry split") Signed-off-by: Kairui Song --- mm/shmem.c | 23 ++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c index b9ddd38621a0..fe3719eb5a3c 100644 --- a/mm/shmem.c +++ b/mm/shmem.c @@ -1211,17 +1211,22 @@ static void shmem_undo_range(struct inode *inode, loff_t lstart, uoff_t lend, swaps_freed = shmem_free_swap(mapping, indices[i], end - 1, folio); if (!swaps_freed) { - /* - * If found a large swap entry cross the end border, - * skip it as the truncate_inode_partial_folio above - * should have at least zerod its content once. - */ + pgoff_t base = indices[i]; + order = shmem_confirm_swap(mapping, indices[i], radix_to_swp_entry(folio)); - if (order > 0 && indices[i] + (1 << order) > end) - continue; - /* Swap was replaced by page: retry */ - index = indices[i]; + /* + * If found a large swap entry cross the end or start + * border, skip it as the truncate_inode_partial_folio + * above should have at least zerod its content once. + */ + if (order > 0) { + base = round_down(base, 1 << order); + if (base < start || base + (1 << order) > end) + continue; + } + /* Swap was replaced by page or extended, retry */ + index = base; break; } nr_swaps_freed += swaps_freed; -- 2.52.0 And I think we really should simplify the whole truncate loop.