From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F40A541C2FF for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 10:22:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788430941; cv=none; b=MA/qgFodsg2ONXm7fZow7W+7mQRUdXaxeScSHs4YZNefdjoWficSraHaIs3ZxJEOc9LsLAdxihE1dTuQDYNJpSz/CndL/GlVeckbwN3KYzwDpF0BtLbFzfChwX6bybJ0ZogirVMb46tS7LBRYg6fktIgYPGH7pLyn0iE+Bq6dek= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788430941; c=relaxed/simple; bh=y5eAV25Di6+lRexAcQwpJDzZ/gfUSBA6sfHaWhIymu8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DeVUYr7t9LGinlIGkEsmSEa8/WU2yFvZa4MqZ6GtYMyFJu4QkbI3GsQSV9dTXxJtmQ/xUvqkfELbTpPt/cZnZfvgmKNiG0bRK7gu3oCTSWzBIHNx3+Uc19rV6yX1+HPFznEYoyTzNWtM0iqq87NbOmDOezAUAN2m5Uc5gmQiSQk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QQGCnZ47; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QQGCnZ47" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3F0E1F00A3A; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 10:22:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788430939; bh=vEpLXgLt5BvR7hF8m7cdeksa+geMrv7LSsfWhyIOPZE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=QQGCnZ47fkRm6UHXBzWDo7WAVs9V0NX+m3P2MS54lcMGqQGUej9wXvnyQW72T0glC n7OzcFLuuAiY3n11Eu46S6XXUxBAN1CVPQLr1FyJBs2bl4yBQGnAMBPY9H8NcRXyjA YjboFghi9QegdzYpOuuD7fGUHMXU/m+kc1X53MHJlU89+XXR5tZzyYTJh8aQrYgQze wAWFR31ekI+3/PpGP99vvUHbguigwl05V/yztSWVRhqnDZNHREksFa3ZmH4v7dy6XY If+5urBcnHaeFOPQy19B8nK90jIeozYIESseZMwYnLG+tRDZ9TPFThjMvw7xZVB6Tn jSGeo5Lk7RQsg== Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 11:22:17 +0100 From: Harry Yoo To: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" Cc: Andrew Morton , Hao Li , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Roman Gushchin , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hyunwoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: take n->list_lock in __slab_try_return_freelist() to avoid race Message-ID: References: <20260902-slab-fix-aba-v2-1-d1ece15a8417@kernel.org> 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: On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 06:57:53PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > On 9/2/26 18:41, Harry Yoo (Meta) wrote: > > Commit ba7425312607 ("mm, slab: add an optimistic > > __slab_try_return_freelist()") incorrectly assumed that nobody has freed > > an object to the slab as long as slab->freelist is NULL and cmpxchg > > succeeds. > > > > However, as reported by Hyunwoo Kim [1], other CPUs might have freed > > an object to the slab, insert the slab to the partial list, then > > allocated an object from the slab, and be in the middle of removing > > the slab from the list under n->list_lock. > > > > Since __refill_objects_node() puts the slab back on pc.slabs > > outside n->list_lock, it might insert the slab into that list while > > the slab is concurrently being removed from n->partial. > > This led to a list corruption, as reported by Hyunwoo Kim [1]: > > "as reported by ..." was already said above, we could keep just the [1] or > drop completely? I didn't want to steal the credit for splat ;) but yeah keeping [1] should be enough. > > list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev > > (ffff888100000248), but was dead000000000122. > > (next=ffffea000416e410). > > kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:29! > > Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI > > CPU: 1 UID: 65534 PID: 144 Comm: poc Not tainted > > 7.2.0-16172-gcf72cbb39da8-dirty #1 PREEMPT(lazy) > > RIP: 0010:__list_add_valid_or_report+0x80/0xd0 > > ... > > Call Trace: > > alloc_from_new_slab+0x183/0x300 > > ___slab_alloc+0x31c/0x890 > > __kmalloc_noprof+0x3d4/0x800 > > lsm_blob_alloc+0x2d/0x50 > > security_msg_msg_alloc+0x26/0x90 > > load_msg+0x1aa/0x210 > > do_msgsnd+0x91/0x800 > > do_syscall_64+0x109/0x5d0 > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f > > ... > > Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception > > > > This is a classic ABA problem where cmpxchg succeeds but the state has > > changed since __refill_objects_node() took the freelist from the slab. > > > > As Vlastimil Babka mentioned [2], it should be rare to return more than > > one slab (due to the racy read of slab->counters in > > get_partial_node_bulk()). Therefore, instead of introducing additional > > complexity, acquire and release n->list_lock twice in the worst case. > > > > Return the slab directly to the partial list and hold n->list_lock > > across the cmpxchg and add_partial(). This is similar to the initial > > version of commit ba7425312607 [3]. This is enough to avoid the race as > > the list manipulation is serialized by n->list_lock. While at it, > > bring back unlikely() hint now that the condition is unlikely. > > Ah nicely spotted. Thanks ;-) > > diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c > > index f9b56cb439e7..5cbbacb8ee32 100644 > > --- a/mm/slub.c > > +++ b/mm/slub.c > > @@ -5684,6 +5684,8 @@ static bool __slab_try_return_freelist(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab, > > void *head, int cnt) > > { > > struct freelist_counters old, new; > > + struct kmem_cache_node *n; > > + unsigned long flags; > > > > old.freelist = slab->freelist; > > old.counters = slab->counters; > > @@ -5695,9 +5697,16 @@ static bool __slab_try_return_freelist(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab, > > new.counters = old.counters; > > new.inuse -= cnt; > > > > - if (!slab_update_freelist(s, slab, &old, &new, "__slab_try_return_freelist")) > > + n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab)); > > Wonder if we could just pass the 'n' to __slab_try_return_freelist() that we > already have in the caller. Sounds good, will do. -- Cheers, Harry / Hyeonggon