Skip to content

Commit cce7c15

Browse files
MaxKellermannidryomov
authored andcommitted
ceph: always call ceph_shift_unused_folios_left()
The function ceph_process_folio_batch() sets folio_batch entries to NULL, which is an illegal state. Before folio_batch_release() crashes due to this API violation, the function ceph_shift_unused_folios_left() is supposed to remove those NULLs from the array. However, since commit ce80b76 ("ceph: introduce ceph_process_folio_batch() method"), this shifting doesn't happen anymore because the "for" loop got moved to ceph_process_folio_batch(), and now the `i` variable that remains in ceph_writepages_start() doesn't get incremented anymore, making the shifting effectively unreachable much of the time. Later, commit 1551ec6 ("ceph: introduce ceph_submit_write() method") added more preconditions for doing the shift, replacing the `i` check (with something that is still just as broken): - if ceph_process_folio_batch() fails, shifting never happens - if ceph_move_dirty_page_in_page_array() was never called (because ceph_process_folio_batch() has returned early for some of various reasons), shifting never happens - if `processed_in_fbatch` is zero (because ceph_process_folio_batch() has returned early for some of the reasons mentioned above or because ceph_move_dirty_page_in_page_array() has failed), shifting never happens Since those two commits, any problem in ceph_process_folio_batch() could crash the kernel, e.g. this way: BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000034 #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP NOPTI CPU: 172 UID: 0 PID: 2342707 Comm: kworker/u778:8 Not tainted 6.15.10-cm4all1-es torvalds#714 NONE Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7615/0G9DHV, BIOS 1.6.10 12/08/2023 Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-ceph-1) RIP: 0010:folios_put_refs+0x85/0x140 Code: 83 c5 01 39 e8 7e 76 48 63 c5 49 8b 5c c4 08 b8 01 00 00 00 4d 85 ed 74 05 41 8b 44 ad 00 48 8b 15 b0 > RSP: 0018:ffffb880af8db778 EFLAGS: 00010207 RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000003 RDX: ffffe377cc3b0000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffffb880af8db8c0 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 000000000000007d R09: 000000000102b86f R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 00000000000000ac R12: ffffb880af8db8c0 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff9bd262c97000 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9c8efc303000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000000000000034 CR3: 0000000160958004 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <TASK> ceph_writepages_start+0xeb9/0x1410 The crash can be reproduced easily by changing the ceph_check_page_before_write() return value to `-E2BIG`. (Interestingly, the crash happens only if `huge_zero_folio` has already been allocated; without `huge_zero_folio`, is_huge_zero_folio(NULL) returns true and folios_put_refs() skips NULL entries instead of dereferencing them. That makes reproducing the bug somewhat unreliable. See https://lore.kernel.org/20250826231626.218675-1-max.kellermann@ionos.com for a discussion of this detail.) My suggestion is to move the ceph_shift_unused_folios_left() to right after ceph_process_folio_batch() to ensure it always gets called to fix up the illegal folio_batch state. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: ce80b76 ("ceph: introduce ceph_process_folio_batch() method") Link: https://lore.kernel.org/ceph-devel/aK4v548CId5GIKG1@swift.blarg.de/ Signed-off-by: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com> Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
1 parent bec324f commit cce7c15

File tree

1 file changed

+1
-2
lines changed

1 file changed

+1
-2
lines changed

fs/ceph/addr.c

Lines changed: 1 addition & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1687,6 +1687,7 @@ static int ceph_writepages_start(struct address_space *mapping,
16871687

16881688
process_folio_batch:
16891689
rc = ceph_process_folio_batch(mapping, wbc, &ceph_wbc);
1690+
ceph_shift_unused_folios_left(&ceph_wbc.fbatch);
16901691
if (rc)
16911692
goto release_folios;
16921693

@@ -1695,8 +1696,6 @@ static int ceph_writepages_start(struct address_space *mapping,
16951696
goto release_folios;
16961697

16971698
if (ceph_wbc.processed_in_fbatch) {
1698-
ceph_shift_unused_folios_left(&ceph_wbc.fbatch);
1699-
17001699
if (folio_batch_count(&ceph_wbc.fbatch) == 0 &&
17011700
ceph_wbc.locked_pages < ceph_wbc.max_pages) {
17021701
doutc(cl, "reached end fbatch, trying for more\n");

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)