linux-kernel - [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Don't call numa_set_distanc() for all possible node combinations during emulation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:31:24 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Don't call numa_set_distanc() for all
 possible node combinations during emulation

The distance transforming in numa_emulation() used to call
numa_set_distance() for all MAX_NUMNODES * MAX_NUMNODES node
combinations regardless of which are enabled.  As numa_set_distance()
ignores all out-of-bound distance settings, this doesn't cause any
problem other than looping unnecessarily many times during boot.

However, as MAX_NUMNODES * MAX_NUMNODES can be pretty high, update the
code such that it iterates through only the enabled combinations.

Yinghai Lu identified the issue and provided an initial patch to
address the issue; however, the patch was incorrect in that it didn't
build emulated distance table when there's no physical distance table
and unnecessarily complex.

  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1107986/focus=1107988

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Reported-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c |   23 ++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
index 3696be0..ad091e4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
@@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
 	const u64 max_addr = max_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
 	u8 *phys_dist = NULL;
 	size_t phys_size = numa_dist_cnt * numa_dist_cnt * sizeof(phys_dist[0]);
-	int dfl_phys_nid;
+	int max_emu_nid, dfl_phys_nid;
 	int i, j, ret;
 
 	if (!emu_cmdline)
@@ -358,12 +358,17 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
 					node_distance(i, j);
 	}
 
-	/* determine the default phys nid to use for unmapped nodes */
+	/*
+	 * Determine the max emulated nid and the default phys nid to use
+	 * for unmapped nodes.
+	 */
+	max_emu_nid = 0;
 	dfl_phys_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(emu_nid_to_phys); i++) {
 		if (emu_nid_to_phys[i] != NUMA_NO_NODE) {
-			dfl_phys_nid = emu_nid_to_phys[i];
-			break;
+			max_emu_nid = i;
+			if (dfl_phys_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
+				dfl_phys_nid = emu_nid_to_phys[i];
 		}
 	}
 	if (dfl_phys_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
@@ -393,14 +398,10 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
 		if (emu_nid_to_phys[i] == NUMA_NO_NODE)
 			emu_nid_to_phys[i] = dfl_phys_nid;
 
-	/*
-	 * Transform distance table.  numa_set_distance() ignores all
-	 * out-of-bound distances.  Just call it for every possible node
-	 * combination.
-	 */
+	/* transform distance table */
 	numa_reset_distance();
-	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++) {
-		for (j = 0; j < MAX_NUMNODES; j++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < max_emu_nid + 1; i++) {
+		for (j = 0; j < max_emu_nid + 1; j++) {
 			int physi = emu_nid_to_phys[i];
 			int physj = emu_nid_to_phys[j];
 			int dist;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/