From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] xarray: clear the new head's parent before freeing the old head
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2026 15:45:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <attzI4sj2Pagmvkd@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261012202549.772887-1-nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
If you must have your AI write the commit message, please tell it to
be less verbose. I start losing the will to live after about three
paragraphs of this.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 04:25:49PM -0400, Nickolai Zeldovich wrote:
> When xas_shrink() replaces the head node of an array with the node in its
> slot 0, it stores the child in xa_head, passes the old head to
> xa_node_free(), which queues it with call_rcu(), and only then clears the
> child's ->parent pointer. In between, a lockless walker can still reach
> the old head, not from xa_head but upwards from the new head:
> xas_find(), xas_find_marked(), xas_next() and xas_prev() climb through
> xa_parent() when they step past the end of a node. RCU does not protect
> a walker that gets there: call_rcu() waits only for the read-side
> critical sections that were running when the callback's grace period
> started, and that grace period can start before the parent pointer is
> cleared.
>
> CPU 0: xa_erase(), xa_lock held CPU 1: RCU walker, e.g. xa_find()
>
> xas_shrink()
> xa->xa_head = child
> xa_node_free(old head)
> call_rcu()
> <grace period starts>
> passes a quiescent state
> rcu_read_lock()
> xas_find(): loads xa_head (child),
> steps past its last slot,
> child->parent is still old head
> child->parent = NULL
> xa_unlock()
> quiescent state
> <grace period ends>
> radix_tree_node_rcu_free(old head)
> reads old head's slots[], shift,
> offset and parent
>
> The grace period does not wait for CPU 1, which reported its quiescent
> state before its critical section began; holding xa_lock delays the end
> of the grace period, not its start. The start can fall inside the
> window when an interrupt arrives in it (interrupts are enabled under
> xa_lock(), and RCU core processing may run on interrupt exit), when
> callbacks are offloaded (rcu_nocbs=) and the rcuog kthread on another CPU
> handles the callback, when many callbacks are queued, or while the
> writer is preempted under PREEMPT_RT. Interrupts, and in a guest a
> preempted vCPU, also stretch the window.
>
> After the climb, xas_find(), xas_find_marked() and xas_next() resume in
> the old head at the slot after the child and read its slots[] and shift
> (xas_find_marked() also its mark bitmaps); xas_prev(), for which the
> child is the first slot, steps past the old head at once and reads its
> offset and parent, as the others do when they reach its end. Nothing in
> the walk notices that the node is gone. The climb takes ->parent as it
> is, no lockless path looks at node->array (XA_RCU_FREE), and
> xas_shrink() stores XA_RETRY_ENTRY in slot 0 of the old head only when
> the head shrinks to a single entry, not to a node; the walker does not
> look at slot 0 anyway. radix_tree_node_cachep is not
> SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, so the walker reads freed memory. Once the object
> is reused for a node of another array, the walker returns that array's
> entries or descends and climbs into its nodes.
>
> The order dates from the introduction of xas_shrink() in the commit
> below, which reimplemented radix_tree_shrink(). radix_tree_shrink()
> clears the child's parent pointer before it replaces the head and frees
> the old node, and still does in lib/radix-tree.c. The commit gives no
> reason for the different order and nothing depends on it: xas_update()
> and xa_node_free() only touch the old head.
>
> Clear the child's parent pointer before freeing the old head, as
> radix_tree_shrink() does. The stores are the same, the tree and the
> xa_state the caller sees are the same, and a walker that starts after
> the callback's grace period has begun sees the cleared pointer, like
> every store before call_rcu(), and ends its walk at the new head, which
> covers every index that the old head had an entry for.
>
> A check in the radix-tree test harness that no node passed to
> xa_node_free() is still the parent of a node reachable from xa_head
> fails in xas_shrink() 4731 times in the XArray tests without this patch
> and never with it. No test is added: the race is not deterministic and
> the check needs a hook on xa_node_free(). A harness race test (readers
> walking the whole array with the four climbing walkers while a writer
> stores and erases an entry that adds three levels above the leaf) did
> not hit the window in 20 runs of 200000 erases; with a 1 ms sleep
> injected after xa_node_free() in xas_shrink(), every one of 20 runs
> reported a heap-use-after-free in __xas_next() or __xas_prev() under
> AddressSanitizer, and none did with this patch and the same sleep. On a
> kernel (x86_64 defconfig + KASAN, QEMU), with a 100 ms delay injected at
> the same place, a walk that starts on another CPU 20 ms into the window
> climbs to the old head in each of 20 rounds, and KASAN reports a
> slab-use-after-free of the radix_tree_node freed from rcu_core() when
> the walk takes its next step; with this patch, the walk ends at the new
> head. The XArray and IDA self-tests pass on x86_64 and riscv64.
>
> Found while formally verifying xas_store() against the kernel binary.
>
> Fixes: 58d6ea3085f2 ("xarray: Add XArray unconditional store operations")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Reproduction details: the ordering check wraps each xa_node_free(node)
> call in a copy of lib/xarray.c with a function that walks the tree from
> xa_head and reports the node if it is still reachable or still the
> ->parent of a reachable node. The harness race test links a copy of
> lib/xarray.c with a hook right after the xa_node_free() in xas_shrink()
> that sleeps 1 ms in the writer; 32 threads, liburcu-registered readers.
> Without that sleep, this patch alone still showed a use-after-free in 3
> of 20 runs; those come from the xas_delete_node() bug (the race test
> also erases nodes), and with both patches 20 of 20 runs were clean.
> With only the xas_delete_node() fix, the sleep still gives 20 of 20
> failures. The kernel demonstration is a test build with mdelay(100)
> after xa_node_free() in xas_shrink() for one test array, a writer
> kthread on CPU 0 doing xa_store()/xa_erase() and a reader kthread on
> CPU 1 doing xas_load()/xas_next() under rcu_read_lock(). The window
> has not been hit on an unmodified kernel. I can send any of these if
> useful.
>
> lib/xarray.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/xarray.c b/lib/xarray.c
> index bfe7bef80f34..ae9d7fc68861 100644
> --- a/lib/xarray.c
> +++ b/lib/xarray.c
> @@ -471,11 +471,12 @@ static void xas_shrink(struct xa_state *xas)
> if (!xa_is_node(entry))
> RCU_INIT_POINTER(node->slots[0], XA_RETRY_ENTRY);
> xas_update(xas, node);
> + if (xa_is_node(entry))
> + xa_to_node(entry)->parent = NULL;
> xa_node_free(node);
> if (!xa_is_node(entry))
> break;
> node = xa_to_node(entry);
> - node->parent = NULL;
> }
> }
I think the patch is fine. I understand the infeasibility of adding
a test into the test suite. I've had a good think about other ways we
might spot this happening and haven't come up with anything.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-23 14:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-12 20:25 Nickolai Zeldovich
2026-10-23 14:45 ` Matthew Wilcox [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=attzI4sj2Pagmvkd@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nickolai@csail.mit.edu \
--cc=stable@vger.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®