Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memory-failure: fix refcount leak on soft-offline LBS folio

On 8/3/2026 8:53 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: liyouhong <liyouhong@ kylinos. cn> soft_offline_in_use_page() runs 
> with a folio reference taken by get_hwpoison_page(). Soft-offline skips 
> splitting when min_order_for_split() is non-zero, so large folios stay 
> intact. That early return
> 
> 
> From: liyouhong <[email protected]>
> 
> soft_offline_in_use_page() runs with a folio reference taken by
> get_hwpoison_page().
> 
> Soft-offline skips splitting when min_order_for_split()
> is non-zero, so large folios stay intact. That early
> return -EBUSY path never drops the reference.
> 
> The other failure path is fine: try_to_split_thp_page(..., release=true)
> puts the page when the split itself fails. memory_failure() also puts
> explicitly on its analogous unsplit path.
> 
> Handle the new_order != 0 case separately and call folio_put()
> before returning.
> 
> Fixes: 689b8986776c ("mm/memory-failure: improve large block size folio handling")
> Signed-off-by: liyouhong <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2:
> - Add documentation for the folio reference counting convention of soft_offline_in_use_page().
> - Remove MF_COUNT_INCREASED related description in commit message to avoid misleading.
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> 
> ---
>   mm/memory-failure.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 51508a55c405..3b1e6946821b 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -2776,6 +2776,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(unpoison_memory);
>    * soft_offline_in_use_page handles hugetlb-pages and non-hugetlb pages.
>    * If the page is a non-dirty unmapped page-cache page, it simply invalidates.
>    * If the page is mapped, it migrates the contents over.
> + *
> + * The folio refcount has been incremented before entering this function.
> + * This folio reference must be released before the function returns on all paths.
>    */
>   static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page)
>   {
> @@ -2801,9 +2804,19 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page)
>   		 * NOTE: if minimizing the number of soft offline pages is
>   		 * preferred, split it to non-zero new_order like it is done in
>   		 * memory_failure().
> +		 *
> +		 * Drop the reference obtained upon entry;
> +		 * try_to_split_thp_page(..., release=true) handles refcounting itself
> +		 * when the split fails.
>   		 */
> -		if (new_order || try_to_split_thp_page(page, /* new_order= */ 0,
> -						       /* release= */ true)) {
> +		if (new_order) {
> +			pr_info("%#lx: order-%d folio cannot soft offline\n",
> +				pfn, new_order);
> +			folio_put(folio);
> +			return -EBUSY;
> +		}
> +		if (try_to_split_thp_page(page, /* new_order= */ 0,
> +					 /* release= */ true)) {
>   			pr_info("%#lx: thp split failed\n", pfn);
>   			return -EBUSY;
>   		}
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

It seems me this will do -

--- a/mm/memory-failure.c
+++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
@@ -2802,8 +2802,8 @@ static int soft_offline_in_use_page(struct page *page)
                  * preferred, split it to non-zero new_order like it is 
done in
                  * memory_failure().
                  */
-               if (new_order || try_to_split_thp_page(page, /* 
new_order= */ 0,
-                                                      /* release= */ 
true)) {
+               if (new_order || try_to_split_thp_page(page, false)) {
+                       put_page(page);
                         pr_info("%#lx: thp split failed\n", pfn);
                         return -EBUSY;
                 }


thanks,
-jane

>