Re: [PATCH v4 net] net: page_pool: fix UAF in __page_pool_release_netmem_dma on xa_cmpxchg race

From: Jijie Shao

Date: Wed Aug 05 2026 - 04:21:50 EST



on 2026/8/5 11:50, Mina Almasry wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 7:16 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 10:37:58 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
+ __page_pool_unmap_netmem_dma(pool, netmem);
page_pool_set_dma_addr_netmem(netmem, 0);
+ if (likely(PP_DMA_INDEX_BITS))
+ netmem_set_dma_index(netmem, 0);
I now notice that maybe another cleanup we could have done is open
code __page_pool_unmap_netmem_dma() in this function to cut down 1
helper, and just have the scrub function call
__page_pool_release_netmem_dma() to reduce some code. But this is more
than fine too I think, especially since this is a fix the stable trees
are going to want I guess.
Not sure this is a good idea? scrub is trying to touch just the DMA
mapping, right? It shouldn't try to update the page itself because
it has no reference to the page, the page may get freed in parallel.
Hopefully DMA unmap on a freed page is legal..
Scrub actually frees the page in the loop in
page_pool_empty_ring(pool), so it's not true AFAIU that it 'shouldn't
try to update the page'.

My mental model (roughly) is that the pp has a ref and that single
last ref can be dropped in the page_pool_destroy() path or the
page_pool_put_netmem() path, but the ref can't be dropped twice and
the same goes for dma unmapping.

Now that i look closer at the code I have no idea why we didn't 'just'
put the dma-unmapping inside of page_pool_return_netmem(). That code
path is already common between scrub() and put_netmem() and does the
synchronization between these 2 paths.

When I have time I'll take a look to see if an LLM can find a better
way to do this.

Hi Mina,

Thanks for the Reviewed-by.

I'll send v5 shortly addressing Jakub's requests. The deeper
restructure you're musing about seems orthogonal to this fix,
so let's discuss it separately.

Thanks,
Jijie Shao