Re: [PATCH -mm v2] mm/page_isolation: fix potential warning from user

From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm v2] mm/page_isolation: fix potential warning from user
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 14:30:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c56268d-9b8a-f62e-eca9-7707852a2aaf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200120131909.813-1-cai@lca.pw>

On 20.01.20 14:19, Qian Cai wrote:
> It makes sense to call the WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE)
> from start_isolate_page_range(), but should avoid triggering it from
> userspace, i.e, from is_mem_section_removable() because it could be a
> DoS if warn_on_panic is set.
> 
> While at it, simplify the code a bit by removing an unnecessary jump
> label and a local variable, so set_migratetype_isolate() could really
> return a bool.
> 
> Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
> ---
> 
> v2: Improve the commit log.
>     Warn for all start_isolate_page_range() users not just offlining.
> 
>  mm/page_alloc.c     | 11 ++++-------
>  mm/page_isolation.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------------
>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 621716a25639..3c4eb750a199 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -8231,7 +8231,7 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>  		if (is_migrate_cma(migratetype))
>  			return NULL;
>  
> -		goto unmovable;
> +		return page;
>  	}
>  
>  	for (; iter < pageblock_nr_pages; iter++) {
> @@ -8241,7 +8241,7 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>  		page = pfn_to_page(pfn + iter);
>  
>  		if (PageReserved(page))
> -			goto unmovable;
> +			return page;
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * If the zone is movable and we have ruled out all reserved
> @@ -8261,7 +8261,7 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>  			unsigned int skip_pages;
>  
>  			if (!hugepage_migration_supported(page_hstate(head)))
> -				goto unmovable;
> +				return page;
>  
>  			skip_pages = compound_nr(head) - (page - head);
>  			iter += skip_pages - 1;
> @@ -8303,12 +8303,9 @@ struct page *has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>  		 * is set to both of a memory hole page and a _used_ kernel
>  		 * page at boot.
>  		 */
> -		goto unmovable;
> +		return page;
>  	}
>  	return NULL;
> -unmovable:
> -	WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE);
> -	return pfn_to_page(pfn + iter);
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_CONTIG_ALLOC
> diff --git a/mm/page_isolation.c b/mm/page_isolation.c
> index e70586523ca3..31f5516f5d54 100644
> --- a/mm/page_isolation.c
> +++ b/mm/page_isolation.c
> @@ -15,12 +15,12 @@
>  #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
>  #include <trace/events/page_isolation.h>
>  
> -static int set_migratetype_isolate(struct page *page, int migratetype, int isol_flags)
> +static bool set_migratetype_isolate(struct page *page, int migratetype,
> +				    int isol_flags)

Why this change?

>  {
> -	struct page *unmovable = NULL;
> +	struct page *unmovable = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);

Also, why this change?

>  	struct zone *zone;
>  	unsigned long flags;
> -	int ret = -EBUSY;
>  
>  	zone = page_zone(page);
>  
> @@ -49,21 +49,25 @@ static int set_migratetype_isolate(struct page *page, int migratetype, int isol_
>  									NULL);
>  
>  		__mod_zone_freepage_state(zone, -nr_pages, mt);
> -		ret = 0;
>  	}
>  
>  out:
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
> -	if (!ret)
> +
> +	if (!unmovable) {
>  		drain_all_pages(zone);
> -	else if ((isol_flags & REPORT_FAILURE) && unmovable)
> -		/*
> -		 * printk() with zone->lock held will guarantee to trigger a
> -		 * lockdep splat, so defer it here.
> -		 */
> -		dump_page(unmovable, "unmovable page");
> -
> -	return ret;
> +	} else {
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE);
> +
> +		if ((isol_flags & REPORT_FAILURE) && !IS_ERR(unmovable))
> +			/*

Why this change? (!IS_ERR)

Some things here look unrelated - or I am missing something :)

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb