Re: [Patch mm-hotfixes v4] mm/page_vma_mapped: fix device-private PMD handling
From: David Hildenbrand (Arm)
Date: Fri Jun 26 2026 - 09:51:53 EST
On 6/26/26 15:27, Lance Yang wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 12:07:56PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>> On 6/24/26 08:53, Wei Yang wrote:
>>> Commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support
>>> device-private entries") introduced the concept of device-private
>>> PMD entries, but did not correctly update the rmap walk code to
>>> account for them.
>>>
>>> As a result, when page_vma_mapped_walk() encounters device-private
>>> PMD entries, it takes no action other than to acquire the PMD lock
>>> and exit.
>>>
>>> However this is highly problematic for two reasons - firstly,
>>> device private entries possess a PFN so check_pmd() needs to be
>>> called to ensure an overlapping PFN range.
>>>
>>> Secondly, and more importantly, if PVMW_MIGRATION is set the
>>> caller assumes the returned entry is a migration entry, resulting
>>> in memory corruption when the caller tries to interpret the device
>>> private entry as such.
>>>
>>> In addition, commit 146287290023 ("mm/huge_memory: implement
>>> device-private THP splitting") allowed device private PMDs to be
>>> split like THP mappings, but again did not update this code path.
>>>
>>> As a result, we might race a PMD split prior to acquiring the PMD
>>> lock.
>>>
>>> This patch addresses all of these issues by invoking check_pmd(),
>>> ensuring PMVW_MIGRATION is not set and checks whether a split raced
>>> us we do for PMD THP and migration entries.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries")
>>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbirs@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Lance Yang <lance.yang@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> v4:
>>> * refine subject and commit log based on Lorenzo's suggestion
>>> * put pmd device-private entry handling in its own if branch,
>>> suggested by Lorenzo
>>>
>>> v3:
>>> * remove cleanup part, only fix the issue for device-private entry
>>> * refine user effect description based on Lorenzo's suggestion
>>>
>>> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260616063436.20455-1-richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u
>>> * specify the possible error case of current code and user visible effect
>>> * besides fix, cleanup the pmd entry handling based on David's suggestion
>>>
>>> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260508013728.21285-1-richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx/
>>> ---
>>> mm/page_vma_mapped.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>>> index 2ccbabfb2cc1..17dff8aab9f9 100644
>>> --- a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>>> +++ b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>>> @@ -269,14 +269,24 @@ bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
>>> /* THP pmd was split under us: handle on pte level */
>>> spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
>>> pvmw->ptl = NULL;
>>> - } else if (!pmd_present(pmde)) {
>>> - const softleaf_t entry = softleaf_from_pmd(pmde);
>>> + } else if (pmd_is_device_private_entry(pmde)) {
>>> + softleaf_t entry;
>>> +
>>> + pvmw->ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pvmw->pmd);
>>> + pmde = *pvmw->pmd;
>>> + entry = softleaf_from_pmd(pmde);
>>>
>>> - if (softleaf_is_device_private(entry)) {
>>> - pvmw->ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pvmw->pmd);
>>> + if (likely(softleaf_is_device_private(entry))) {
>>> + if (pvmw->flags & PVMW_MIGRATION)
>>> + return not_found(pvmw);
>>> + if (!check_pmd(softleaf_to_pfn(entry), pvmw))
>>> + return not_found(pvmw);
>>> return true;
>>> }
>>> -
>>> + /* device-private pmd was split under us: handle on pte level */
>>> + spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
>>> + pvmw->ptl = NULL;
>>> + } else if (!pmd_present(pmde)) {
>>> if ((pvmw->flags & PVMW_SYNC) &&
>>> thp_vma_suitable_order(vma, pvmw->address,
>>> PMD_ORDER) &&
>>
>> This is extremely hard to review given the existing crap handling here. I'm
>> really sorry, but it makes my head hurt (I'm not kidding :) ).
>>
>> It's completely unclear why we only have to check for a subset of the cases
>> after taking the lock.
>>
>> Could we simply extend the existing migration pmd handling and leave the
>> !pmd_present() case for pmd_none()?
>>
>> That leaves no question to "which transitions are actually allowed", including
>> "could we accidentally assume something is a page table when really it isn't".
>>
>>
>> So what about something like the following?
>>
>> The "thp_migration_supported()" is not required when checking for
>> pmd_is_migration_entry(), as that defaults to "false" when not compiled in.
>>
>> Untested:
>>
>>
>> >From 048ecd33673ec649e168fbbb97749a7c0e344fcd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 12:03:40 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] tmp
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> mm/page_vma_mapped.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>> index 2ccbabfb2cc17..ed2a23a90e8dd 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
>> @@ -243,21 +243,31 @@ bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
>> */
>> pmde = pmdp_get_lockless(pvmw->pmd);
>>
>> - if (pmd_trans_huge(pmde) || pmd_is_migration_entry(pmde)) {
>> + if (pmd_trans_huge(pmde) || pmd_is_migration_entry(pmde) ||
>> + pmd_is_device_private_entry(pmde)) {
>> pvmw->ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pvmw->pmd);
>> pmde = *pvmw->pmd;
>> - if (!pmd_present(pmde)) {
>> + if (pmd_is_migration_entry(pmde)) {
>> softleaf_t entry;
>>
>> - if (!thp_migration_supported() ||
>> - !(pvmw->flags & PVMW_MIGRATION))
>> + if (!(pvmw->flags & PVMW_MIGRATION))
>> return not_found(pvmw);
>> entry = softleaf_from_pmd(pmde);
>> + if (!check_pmd(softleaf_to_pfn(entry), pvmw))
>> + return not_found(pvmw);
>> + return true;
>> + } else if (pmd_is_device_private_entry(pmde)) {
>> + softleaf_t entry;
>>
>> - if (!softleaf_is_migration(entry) ||
>> - !check_pmd(softleaf_to_pfn(entry), pvmw))
>> + if (pvmw->flags & PVMW_MIGRATION)
>> + return not_found(pvmw);
>> + entry = softleaf_from_pmd(pmde);
>> + if (!check_pmd(softleaf_to_pfn(entry), pvmw))
>> return not_found(pvmw);
>> return true;
>> + } else if (!pmd_present(pmde) ){
>> + return not_found(pvmw);
>> }
>> if (likely(pmd_trans_huge(pmde))) {
>> if (pvmw->flags & PVMW_MIGRATION)
>> @@ -270,12 +280,7 @@ bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
>> spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
>> pvmw->ptl = NULL;
>> } else if (!pmd_present(pmde)) {
>> - const softleaf_t entry = softleaf_from_pmd(pmde);
>> -
>> - if (softleaf_is_device_private(entry)) {
>> - pvmw->ptl = pmd_lock(mm, pvmw->pmd);
>> - return true;
>> - }
>>
>> if ((pvmw->flags & PVMW_SYNC) &&
>> thp_vma_suitable_order(vma, pvmw->address,
>> --
>
> Might be good with this on top:
>
> ---8<---
> diff --git a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
> index cfa1230c87bb..8b7c062bd81d 100644
> --- a/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
> +++ b/mm/page_vma_mapped.c
> @@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
> return not_found(pvmw);
> return true;
> }
> - /* THP pmd was split under us: handle on pte level */
> + /* THP/device-private pmd was split under us: handle on pte level */
> spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
> pvmw->ptl = NULL;
> } else if (!pmd_present(pmde)) {
> --
>
> Looks good to me as well, thanks!
Makes sense, thanks!
--
Cheers,
David