Re: [PATCH] mm/slab: fix an incorrect check in obj_exts_alloc_size()

[Harry Yoo]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 04:22:19PM +0900, Harry Yoo wrote:
> obj_exts_alloc_size() prevents recursive allocation of slabobj_ext
> array from the same cache, to avoid creating slabs that are never freed.
> 
> There is one mistake that returns the original size when memory
> allocation profiling is disabled. The assumption was that
> memcg-triggered slabobj_ext allocation is always served from
> KMALLOC_CGROUP type. But this is wrong [1]: when the caller specifies
> both __GFP_RECLAIMABLE and __GFP_ACCOUNT with SLUB_TINY enabled, the
> allocation is served from normal kmalloc. This is because kmalloc_type()
> prioritizes __GFP_RECLAIMABLE over __GFP_ACCOUNT, and SLUB_TINY aliases
> KMALLOC_RECLAIM with KMALLOC_NORMAL.
> 
> As a result, the recursion guard is bypassed and the problematic slabs
> can be created. Fix this by removing the mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()
> check entirely. The remaining is_kmalloc_normal() check is still
> sufficient to detect whether the cache is of KMALLOC_NORMAL type and
> avoid bumping the size if it's not.
> 
> Without SLUB_TINY, no functional change intended.
> With SLUB_TINY, allocations with __GFP_ACCOUNT|__GFP_RECLAIMABLE
> now allocate a larger array if the sizes equal.
> 
> Reported-by: Zw Tang <shicenci@xxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 280ea9c3154b ("mm/slab: avoid allocating slabobj_ext array from its own slab")
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAPHJ_VKuMKSke8b11AZQw1PTSFN4n2C0gFxC6xGOG0ZLHgPmnA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [1]
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> Zw Tang, could you please confirm that the warning disappears
> on your test environment, with this patch applied?

Oops, I think I saw Zw Tang's Tested-by: (thanks!), but appearently
it's not sent to linux-mm. Could you please add your Tested-by:
by replying to all, again?

-- 
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon