Re: [PATCH v5] mm/hugetlb_cma: Fix null nodemask dereference in hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio

From: Muchun Song

Date: Sun Aug 09 2026 - 22:24:29 EST




> On Aug 10, 2026, at 04:11, Sourav Panda <souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 11:58 PM Muchun Song <muchun.song@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 9, 2026, at 12:32, Sourav Panda <souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> alloc_buddy_hugetlb_folio_with_mpol() can pass a NULL nodemask to
>>> alloc_fresh_hugetlb_folio() as a fallback to allocate from all
>>> nodes. If order is gigantic, alloc_fresh_hugetlb_folio() propagates
>>> the NULL nodemask down to hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio() via
>>> alloc_gigantic_frozen_folio().
>>>
>>> Additionally, hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio() previously attempted
>>> allocation on hugetlb_cma[nid] without verifying if nid is included in
>>> the caller's nodemask. Adding a node_isset(nid, *nodemask) check ensures
>>> the initial preferred node allocation honors the memory policy / nodemask.
>>>
>>> However, hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio() dereferences the nodemask in
>>> node_isset(nid, *nodemask) and for_each_node_mask(node, *nodemask),
>>> leading to a null pointer dereference kernel panic when nodemask is NULL.
>>>
>>> Fix this by checking if nodemask is NULL in
>>> hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio() and defaulting it to
>>> cpuset_current_mems_allowed (safely read using a seqcount retry loop).
>>> This ensures that the initial node check and fallback loop safely honor
>>> the task's cpuset without violating cpuset constraints or causing NULL
>>> pointer dereferences.
>>>
>>> From a userspace perspective, this bug allows an unprivileged user to
>>> crash the kernel (trigger a panic) by requesting a gigantic hugepage
>>> allocation with MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY on a system where CMA is only
>>> configured on a subset of NUMA nodes.
>>>
>>> This can be reproduced by booting a VM with two NUMA nodes, restricting
>>> CMA to Node 1 (e.g., hugetlb_cma=1:1G default_hugepagesz=1G
>>> hugepagesz=1G hugepages=0), and running a program that allocates a
>>> 1GB hugepage area without reserving, restricts allocation to Node 0
>>> using mbind() with MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY, and triggers a page fault:
>>>
>>> void *ptr = mmap(NULL, 1UL << 30, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
>>> MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_HUGETLB |
>>> MAP_HUGE_1GB | MAP_NORESERVE, -1, 0);
>>> unsigned long nodemask = 1; /* Node 0 */
>>> mbind(ptr, 1UL << 30, MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY, &nodemask,
>>> sizeof(nodemask) * 8, 0);
>>> memset(ptr, 0, 1UL << 30); /* Trigger fault */
>>>
>>> This results in a NULL pointer dereference:
>>>
>>> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000
>>> #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
>>> #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
>>> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI
>>> RIP: 0010:hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio+0x75/0x120
>>> Call Trace:
>>> <TASK>
>>> only_alloc_fresh_hugetlb_folio.isra.0+0x2c/0x160
>>> alloc_surplus_hugetlb_folio+0x6d/0x100
>>> alloc_hugetlb_folio+0x3c5/0x660
>>> hugetlb_no_page+0x3d9/0x650
>>>
>>> Fixes: eb02f14c4a2b ("mm/hugetlb: allow overcommitting gigantic hugepages")
>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Signed-off-by: Sourav Panda <souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v5:
>>> - Replaced defaulting nodemask to &node_states[N_MEMORY] with safely reading
>>> cpuset_current_mems_allowed using a seqcount retry loop, ensuring fallback
>>> allocations comply with task hardwall cpusets as suggested by Usama Arif.
>>> - v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260726072935.3513996-1-souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx/
>>> - v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260705175119.440599-1-souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx/
>>> - v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260704174930.2885785-1-souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx/
>>> - v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260702215713.627941-1-souravpanda@xxxxxxxxxx/
>>>
>>> mm/hugetlb_cma.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb_cma.c b/mm/hugetlb_cma.c
>>> index 39344d6c78d8..3ae9347078e9 100644
>>> --- a/mm/hugetlb_cma.c
>>> +++ b/mm/hugetlb_cma.c
>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/mm.h>
>>> #include <linux/cma.h>
>>> #include <linux/compiler.h>
>>> +#include <linux/cpuset.h>
>>> #include <linux/mm_inline.h>
>>>
>>> #include <asm/page.h>
>>> @@ -30,11 +31,23 @@ struct folio *hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio(int order, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>>> int node;
>>> struct folio *folio;
>>> struct page *page = NULL;
>>> + nodemask_t local_node_mask;
>>>
>>> if (!hugetlb_cma_size)
>>> return NULL;
>>>
>>> - if (hugetlb_cma[nid])
>>> + if (!nodemask) {
>>> + unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
>>> +
>>> + do {
>>> + cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
>>> + local_node_mask = cpuset_current_mems_allowed;
>>
>> I think it only makes sense to move cma_alloc_frozen_compound() inside the
>> loop. Otherwise, during subsequent memory allocations, we could still face
>> unexpected allocation failures.
>>
>> Muchun,
>> Thanks.
>
> Hi Muchun!

Hi,

>
> What do you think of the following diff? This way
> cma_alloc_frozen_compound is also protected from stale nodemasks.
>
> if (!hugetlb_cma_size)
> return NULL;
>
> - if (hugetlb_cma[nid])
> +retry_cpuset:
> + if (!nodemask) {
> + cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
> + local_node_mask = cpuset_current_mems_allowed;
> + nmask = &local_node_mask;
> + } else {
> + nmask = nodemask;
> + }
> +
> + if (hugetlb_cma[nid] && node_isset(nid, *nmask))
> page = cma_alloc_frozen_compound(hugetlb_cma[nid], order);
>
> if (!page && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)) {
> - for_each_node_mask(node, *nodemask) {
> + for_each_node_mask(node, *nmask) {
> if (node == nid || !hugetlb_cma[node])
> continue;
>
> @@ -48,6 +61,9 @@ struct folio *hugetlb_cma_alloc_frozen_folio(int
> order, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> }
> }
>
> + if (!page && !nodemask &&
> unlikely(read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie)))
> + goto retry_cpuset;
> +
> if (!page)
> return NULL;

The overall looks good to me. But can we change it to this here?

if (!page) {
if (!nodemask &&
unlikely(read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie)))
goto retry_cpuset;
return NULL;
}

That way, we can remove the 'if (!page)' check here.

Muchun,
Thanks.

>
> If this looks good to you, I'll send out v6 with this change.
>
> With regards,
> Sourav Panda
>
>>
>>> + } while (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie));
>>> +
>>> + nodemask = &local_node_mask;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (hugetlb_cma[nid] && node_isset(nid, *nodemask))
>>> page = cma_alloc_frozen_compound(hugetlb_cma[nid], order);
>>>
>>> if (!page && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)) {
>>> --
>>> 2.55.0