From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934557AbdEVT0w (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 May 2017 15:26:52 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f171.google.com ([209.85.192.171]:33248 "EHLO mail-pf0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932888AbdEVT0t (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 May 2017 15:26:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 12:26:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Xishi Qiu cc: Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , Tejun Heo , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Minchan Kim , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , aarcange@redhat.com, sumeet.keswani@hpe.com, Rik van Riel , Linux MM , LKML , zhong jiang Subject: Re: mm, something wring in page_lock_anon_vma_read()? In-Reply-To: <5922B3D4.1030700@huawei.com> Message-ID: References: <591D6D79.7030704@huawei.com> <591EB25C.9080901@huawei.com> <591EBE71.7080402@huawei.com> <591F9A09.6010707@huawei.com> <591FA78E.9050307@huawei.com> <5922B3D4.1030700@huawei.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 May 2017, Xishi Qiu wrote: > On 2017/5/20 10:40, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Sat, 20 May 2017, Xishi Qiu wrote: > >> > >> Here is a bug report form redhat: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305620 > >> And I meet the bug too. However it is hard to reproduce, and > >> 624483f3ea82598("mm: rmap: fix use-after-free in __put_anon_vma") is not help. > >> > >> From the vmcore, it seems that the page is still mapped(_mapcount=0 and _count=2), > >> and the value of mapping is a valid address(mapping = 0xffff8801b3e2a101), > >> but anon_vma has been corrupted. > >> > >> Any ideas? > > > > Sorry, no. I assume that _mapcount has been misaccounted, for example > > a pte mapped in on top of another pte; but cannot begin tell you where > > Hi Hugh, > > What does "a pte mapped in on top of another pte" mean? Could you give more info? I mean, there are various places in mm/memory.c which decide what they intend to do based on orig_pte, then take pte lock, then check that pte_same(pte, orig_pte) before taking it any further. If a pte_same() check were missing (I do not know of any such case), then two racing tasks might install the same pte, one on top of the other - page mapcount being incremented twice, but decremented only once when that pte is finally unmapped later. Please see similar discussion in the earlier thread at marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=148222656211837&w=2 Hugh > > Thanks, > Xishi Qiu > > > in Red Hat's kernel-3.10.0-229.4.2.el7 that might happen. > > > > Hugh