Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm/page_isolation: guard compound_order() against racing
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Thu Aug 27 2026 - 23:47:51 EST
On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 20:05:49 +0800 Qi Xi <xiqi2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The PageCompound branch reads compound_head() without holding a reference.
> A racing split or free can cause compound_head() to return a stale pointer,
> and compound_nr() reads the order from that stale head, leading to
> out-of-range shifts and making the skip distance meaningless.
>
> Read the order explicitly with compound_order() and validate it is within
> MAX_FOLIO_ORDER before shifting. Also verify the derived head_pfn against
> the legitimate pfn: the head must not be past pfn, must be aligned to
> nr_pages, and pfn must fall within the compound page. Bail out with
> -EBUSY if any check fails.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/page_isolation.c
> +++ b/mm/page_isolation.c
> @@ -418,10 +418,28 @@ static int isolate_single_pageblock(unsigned long boundary_pfn,
> if (PageCompound(page)) {
> struct page *head = compound_head(page);
> unsigned long head_pfn = page_to_pfn(head);
> - unsigned long nr_pages = compound_nr(head);
> + unsigned int order = compound_order(head);
> + unsigned long nr_pages;
> +
> + /* compound_order() is racy. Cap it at MAX_FOLIO_ORDER. */
> + if (order > MAX_FOLIO_ORDER)
> + goto failed;
> +
> + nr_pages = 1UL << order;
> +
> + /*
> + * compound_head() is also racy, so the derived head_pfn
> + * needs additional checks to make sure it is valid.
> + * Otherwise, just fail the check. pfn comes from
> + * __first_valid_page() as a legitimate PFN, so use it to
> + * check head_pfn.
> + */
> + if (head_pfn > pfn || !IS_ALIGNED(head_pfn, nr_pages) ||
> + pfn - head_pfn >= nr_pages)
> + goto failed;
>
> if (head_pfn + nr_pages <= boundary_pfn ||
> - PageHuge(page)) {
> + PageHuge(head)) {
Sashiko suggests that this PageHuge() test suffers the same issue?
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260825120549.966271-1-xiqi2@xxxxxxxxxx
> pfn = head_pfn + nr_pages;
> continue;
> }
> --
> 2.33.0
>