6.17-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Wei Yang richard.weiyang@gmail.com
commit cff47b9e39a6abf03dde5f4f156f841b0c54bba0 upstream.
Commit c010d47f107f ("mm: thp: split huge page to any lower order pages") introduced an early check on the folio's order via mapping->flags before proceeding with the split work.
This check introduced a bug: for shmem folios in the swap cache and truncated folios, the mapping pointer can be NULL. Accessing mapping->flags in this state leads directly to a NULL pointer dereference.
This commit fixes the issue by moving the check for mapping != NULL before any attempt to access mapping->flags.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20251119235302.24773-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com Fixes: c010d47f107f ("mm: thp: split huge page to any lower order pages") Signed-off-by: Wei Yang richard.weiyang@gmail.com Reviewed-by: Zi Yan ziy@nvidia.com Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) david@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Baolin Wang baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- mm/huge_memory.c | 22 ++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c @@ -3626,6 +3626,16 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *f if (folio != page_folio(split_at) || folio != page_folio(lock_at)) return -EINVAL;
+ /* + * Folios that just got truncated cannot get split. Signal to the + * caller that there was a race. + * + * TODO: this will also currently refuse shmem folios that are in the + * swapcache. + */ + if (!is_anon && !folio->mapping) + return -EBUSY; + if (new_order >= folio_order(folio)) return -EINVAL;
@@ -3666,18 +3676,6 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *f gfp_t gfp;
mapping = folio->mapping; - - /* Truncated ? */ - /* - * TODO: add support for large shmem folio in swap cache. - * When shmem is in swap cache, mapping is NULL and - * folio_test_swapcache() is true. - */ - if (!mapping) { - ret = -EBUSY; - goto out; - } - min_order = mapping_min_folio_order(folio->mapping); if (new_order < min_order) { ret = -EINVAL;