mm: mempolicy: fix mbind_range() && vma_adjust() interaction
vma_adjust() does vma_set_policy(vma, vma_policy(next)) and this
is doubly wrong:
1. This leaks vma->vm_policy if it is not NULL and not equal to
next->vm_policy.
This can happen if vma_merge() expands "area", not prev (case 8).
2. This sets the wrong policy if vma_merge() joins prev and area,
area is the vma the caller needs to update and it still has the
old policy.
Revert commit 1444f92c8498 ("mm: merging memory blocks resets
mempolicy") which introduced these problems.
Change mbind_range() to recheck mpol_equal() after vma_merge() to fix
the problem that commit tried to address.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Steven T Hampson <steven.t.hampson@intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index 7431001..4baf12e 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -732,7 +732,10 @@
if (prev) {
vma = prev;
next = vma->vm_next;
- continue;
+ if (mpol_equal(vma_policy(vma), new_pol))
+ continue;
+ /* vma_merge() joined vma && vma->next, case 8 */
+ goto replace;
}
if (vma->vm_start != vmstart) {
err = split_vma(vma->vm_mm, vma, vmstart, 1);
@@ -744,6 +747,7 @@
if (err)
goto out;
}
+ replace:
err = vma_replace_policy(vma, new_pol);
if (err)
goto out;
