From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Sourabh Jain" <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Aditya Gupta" <adityag@linux.ibm.com>,
"Baoquan He" <baoquan.he@linux.dev>,
"Madhavan Srinivasan" <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
"Pratyush Yadav" <pratyush@kernel.org>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org,
"Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>,
"Mahesh Salgaonkar" <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
"Hari Bathini" <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Pasha Tatashin" <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Alexander Graf" <graf@amazon.com>,
"Shrikanth Hegde" <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
"Shivang Upadhyay" <shivangu@linux.ibm.com>,
"Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@gmail.com>,
"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] kho: check scratch vs CMA alignment at runtime
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 08:41:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260928084152.B52D21F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260928083226.107807-2-sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] kho: bypassed scratch alignment check during resume causes memory corruption
--
commit cbd7cb7f008e704b389d8dfe3306e1e83e49e8a8
Author: Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
kho: check scratch vs CMA alignment at runtime
KHO requires the scratch alignment to be at least CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES,
which was previously enforced with a static_assert(). This commit replaces
the static_assert() with a runtime check in kho_reserve_scratch() to allow
KHO on configurations where the minimum alignment is not a constant.
> diff --git a/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c b/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c
> index 7c4d86daf86d5..dc76dd6b74da7 100644
> --- a/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c
> +++ b/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -836,6 +828,21 @@ static void __init kho_reserve_scratch(void)
> if (!kho_enable)
> return;
>
> + /*
> + * This is the minimal alignment required by deferred struct page init.
> + * deferred_init_memmap_chunk frees memory to the buddy allocator, which looks
> + * at the neighboring pages (up to MAX_PAGE_ORDER) to merge them.
> + * If KHO scratch is not aligned to that value, buddy can access uninitialized
> + * struct pages, which can cause a crash.
> + */
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(SCRATCH_ALIGNMENT_BYTES < CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES)) {
> + pr_err("scratch alignment %lu < CMA minimum %lu, disabling\n",
> + (unsigned long)SCRATCH_ALIGNMENT_BYTES,
> + (unsigned long)CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES);
> + kho_enable = false;
> + return;
> + }
> +
[Severity: High]
Does this new runtime check get bypassed during a KHO resume?
During a KHO resume, kho_memory_init() skips kho_reserve_scratch():
kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c:kho_memory_init() {
if (kho_in.scratch_phys)
kho_mem_retrieve();
else
kho_reserve_scratch();
}
If a predecessor kernel passes a scratch region with a smaller alignment,
and the successor kernel has a larger pageblock_order, bypassing this check
means kho_init() will iterate over the provided scratch memory using the
successor kernel's larger pageblock_nr_pages:
kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c:kho_init() {
for (pfn = base_pfn; pfn < base_pfn + count;
pfn += pageblock_nr_pages)
init_cma_reserved_pageblock(pfn_to_page(pfn));
}
Can this lead to init_cma_reserved_pageblock() overwriting state for pages
outside the actual scratch region bounds, or cause a crash in the buddy
allocator if __free_pages() is called on an unaligned PFN?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260928083226.107807-1-sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-28 8:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 8:32 [PATCH v1 0/2] powerpc: enable Kexec HandOver (KHO) Sourabh Jain
2026-09-28 8:32 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] kho: check scratch vs CMA alignment at runtime Sourabh Jain
2026-09-28 8:41 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-01 3:30 ` Sourabh Jain
2026-10-03 7:59 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-10-05 9:12 ` Sourabh Jain
2026-09-28 8:32 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] powerpc: add support for Kexec HandOver (KHO) Sourabh Jain
2026-09-28 8:43 ` sashiko-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260928084152.B52D21F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baoquan.he@linux.dev \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=shivangu@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®