FlawAtlas
Search the atlas
CVE-2022-48797 High

mm: don't try to NUMA-migrate COW pages that have other uses

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: don't try to NUMA-migrate COW pages that have other uses Oded Gabbay reports that enabling NUMA balancing causes corruption with his Gaudi accelerator test load: "All the details are in the bug, but the bottom line is that somehow, this patch causes corruption when the numa balancing feature is enabled AND we don't use process affinity AND we use GUP to pin pages so our accelerator can DMA to/from system memory. Either disabling numa balancing, using process affinity to bind to specific numa-node or reverting this patch causes the bug to disappear" and Oded bisected the issue to commit 09854ba94c6a ("mm: do_wp_page() simplification"). Now, the NUMA balancing shouldn't actually be changing the writability of a page, and as such shouldn't matter for COW. But it appears it does. Suspicious. However, regardless of that, the condition for enabling NUMA faults in change_pte_range() is nonsensical. It uses "page_mapcount(page)" to decide if a COW page should be NUMA-protected or not, and that makes absolutely no sense. The number of mappings a page has is irrelevant: not only does GUP get a reference to a page as in Oded's case, but the other mappings migth be paged out and the only reference to them would be in the page count. Since we should never try to NUMA-balance a page that we can't move anyway due to other references, just fix the code to use 'page_count()'. Oded confirms that that fixes his issue. Now, this does imply that something in NUMA balancing ends up changing page protections (other than the obvious one of making the page inaccessible to get the NUMA faulting information). Otherwise the COW simplification wouldn't matter - since doing the GUP on the page would make sure it's writable. The cause of that permission change would be good to figure out too, since it clearly results in spurious COW events - but fixing the nonsensical test that just happened to work before is obviously the CorrectThing(tm) to do regardless.

Exploit probability 0.2%
Published July 16, 2024
Required by Not available
Last source change August 12, 2026

02 / AFFECTED SOFTWARE

Affected packages

Linux Kernel
Unknown Unknown

03 / CONNECTIONS

Connected vulnerabilities

04 / EVIDENCE

Source records

Open Source Vulnerabilities CVE-2022-48797

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: don't try to NUMA-migrate COW pages that have other uses Oded Gabbay reports that enabling NUMA balancing causes corruption with his Gaudi accelerator test load: "All the details are in the bug, but the bottom line is that somehow, this patch causes corruption when the numa balancing feature is enabled AND we don't use process affinity AND we use GUP to pin pages so our accelerator can DMA to/from system memory. Either disabling numa balancing, using process affinity to bind to specific numa-node or reverting this patch causes the bug to disappear" and Oded bisected the issue to commit 09854ba94c6a ("mm: do_wp_page() simplification"). Now, the NUMA balancing shouldn't actually be changing the writability of a page, and as such shouldn't matter for COW. But it appears it does. Suspicious. However, regardless of that, the condition for enabling NUMA faults in change_pte_range() is nonsensical. It uses "page_mapcount(page)" to decide if a COW page should be NUMA-protected or not, and that makes absolutely no sense. The number of mappings a page has is irrelevant: not only does GUP get a reference to a page as in Oded's case, but the other mappings migth be paged out and the only reference to them would be in the page count. Since we should never try to NUMA-balance a page that we can't move anyway due to other references, just fix the code to use 'page_count()'. Oded confirms that that fixes his issue. Now, this does imply that something in NUMA balancing ends up changing page protections (other than the obvious one of making the page inaccessible to get the NUMA faulting information). Otherwise the COW simplification wouldn't matter - since doing the GUP on the page would make sure it's writable. The cause of that permission change would be good to figure out too, since it clearly results in spurious COW events - but fixing the nonsensical test that just happened to work before is obviously the CorrectThing(tm) to do regardless.

View original source

05 / REFERENCES

Further evidence