[PATCH] mm/userfaultfd: Allow hugetlb change protection upon poison entry

[peterx]

From: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>

After UFFDIO_POISON, there can be two kinds of hugetlb pte markers, either
the POISON one or UFFD_WP one.

Allow change protection to run on a poisoned marker just like !hugetlb
cases, ignoring the marker irrelevant of the permission.

Here the two bits are mutual exclusive. For example, when install a
poisoned entry it must not be UFFD_WP already (by checking pte_none()
before such install).  And it also means if UFFD_WP is set there must have
no POISON bit set.  It makes sense because UFFD_WP is a bit to reflect
permission, and permissions do not apply if the pte is poisoned and
destined to sigbus.

So here we simply check uffd_wp bit set first, do nothing otherwise.

Attach the Fixes to UFFDIO_POISON work, as before that it should not be
possible to have poison entry for hugetlb (e.g., hugetlb doesn't do swap,
so no chance of swapin errors).

Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 6.6+
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/000000000000920d5e0615602dd1@xxxxxxxxxx
Reported-by: syzbot+b07c8ac8eee3d4d8440f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: fc71884a5f59 ("mm: userfaultfd: add new UFFDIO_POISON ioctl")
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 mm/hugetlb.c | 10 +++++++---
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
index 8267e221ca5d..ba7162441adf 100644
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -6960,9 +6960,13 @@ long hugetlb_change_protection(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			if (!pte_same(pte, newpte))
 				set_huge_pte_at(mm, address, ptep, newpte, psize);
 		} else if (unlikely(is_pte_marker(pte))) {
-			/* No other markers apply for now. */
-			WARN_ON_ONCE(!pte_marker_uffd_wp(pte));
-			if (uffd_wp_resolve)
+			/*
+			 * Do nothing on a poison marker; page is
+			 * corrupted, permissons do not apply.  Here
+			 * pte_marker_uffd_wp()==true implies !poison
+			 * because they're mutual exclusive.
+			 */
+			if (pte_marker_uffd_wp(pte) && uffd_wp_resolve)
 				/* Safe to modify directly (non-present->none). */
 				huge_pte_clear(mm, address, ptep, psize);
 		} else if (!huge_pte_none(pte)) {
-- 
2.44.0