Re: [PATCH v4 net] net: page_pool: fix UAF in __page_pool_release_netmem_dma on xa_cmpxchg race

Jijie Shao <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
on 2026/8/5 11:50, Mina Almasry wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 7:16 PM Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 10:37:58 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
>>>> +       __page_pool_unmap_netmem_dma(pool, netmem);
>>>>          page_pool_set_dma_addr_netmem(netmem, 0);
>>>> +       if (likely(PP_DMA_INDEX_BITS))
>>>> +               netmem_set_dma_index(netmem, 0);
>>> I now notice that maybe another cleanup we could have done is open
>>> code __page_pool_unmap_netmem_dma() in this function to cut down 1
>>> helper, and just have the scrub function call
>>> __page_pool_release_netmem_dma() to reduce some code. But this is more
>>> than fine too I think, especially since this is a fix the stable trees
>>> are going to want I guess.
>> Not sure this is a good idea? scrub is trying to touch just the DMA
>> mapping, right? It shouldn't try to update the page itself because
>> it has no reference to the page, the page may get freed in parallel.
>> Hopefully DMA unmap on a freed page is legal..
> Scrub actually frees the page in the loop in
> page_pool_empty_ring(pool), so it's not true AFAIU that it 'shouldn't
> try to update the page'.
>
> My mental model (roughly) is that the pp has a ref and that single
> last ref can be dropped in the page_pool_destroy() path or the
> page_pool_put_netmem() path, but the ref can't be dropped twice and
> the same goes for dma unmapping.
>
> Now that i look closer at the code I have no idea why we didn't 'just'
> put the dma-unmapping inside of page_pool_return_netmem(). That code
> path is already common between scrub() and put_netmem() and does the
> synchronization between these 2 paths.
>
> When I have time I'll take a look to see if an LLM can find a better
> way to do this.

Hi Mina,

Thanks for the Reviewed-by.

I'll send v5 shortly addressing Jakub's requests. The deeper
restructure you're musing about seems orthogonal to this fix,
so let's discuss it separately.

Thanks,
Jijie Shao
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.