In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm: huge_memory: fix misused mapping_large_folio_support() for anon folios
When I did a large folios split test, a WARNING "[ 5059.122759][ T166]
Cannot split file folio to non-0 order" was triggered. But the test cases
are only for anonmous folios. while mapping_large_folio_support() is only
reasonable for page cache folios.
In split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(), the folio passed to
mapping_large_folio_support() maybe anonmous folio. The folio_test_anon()
check is missing. So the split of the anonmous THP is failed. This is
also the same for shmem_mapping(). We'd better add a check for both. But
the shmem_mapping() in __split_huge_page() is not involved, as for
anonmous folios, the end parameter is set to -1, so (head[i].index >= end)
is always false. shmem_mapping() is not called.
Also add a VM_WARN_ON_ONCE() in mapping_large_folio_support() for anon
mapping, So we can detect the wrong use more easily.
THP folios maybe exist in the pagecache even the file system doesn't
support large folio, it is because when CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE is
enabled, khugepaged will try to collapse read-only file-backed pages to
THP. But the mapping does not actually support multi order large folios
properly.
Using /sys/kernel/debug/split_huge_pages to verify this, with this patch,
large anon THP is successfully split and the warning is ceased.
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
References
History
Wed, 11 Sep 2024 13:30:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
Metrics |
ssvc
|
MITRE
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published: 2024-07-12T12:31:54.815Z
Updated: 2024-11-05T09:33:46.314Z
Reserved: 2024-07-12T12:17:45.591Z
Link: CVE-2024-40950
Vulnrichment
Updated: 2024-08-02T04:39:55.883Z
NVD
Status : Awaiting Analysis
Published: 2024-07-12T13:15:17.353
Modified: 2024-07-12T16:34:58.687
Link: CVE-2024-40950
Redhat