linux-kernel - Re: [Part1 PATCH v5 16/22] x86, mm, numa: Move numa emulation handling down.

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:	Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:25:41 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>,
	Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	mina86@...a86.com, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	Vasilis Liaskovitis <vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com>,
	lwoodman@...hat.com, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	jweiner@...hat.com, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [Part1 PATCH v5 16/22] x86, mm, numa: Move numa emulation
 handling down.

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 09:03:03PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
>>> From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
>>>
>>> numa_emulation() needs to allocate buffer for new numa_meminfo
>>> and distance matrix, so execute it later in x86_numa_init().
>>>
>>> Also we change the behavoir:
>>>       - before this patch, if user input wrong data in command
>>>         line, it will fall back to next numa probing or disabling
>>>         numa.
>>>       - after this patch, if user input wrong data in command line,
>>>         it will stay with numa info probed from previous probing,
>>>         like ACPI SRAT or amd_numa.
>>>
>>> We need to call numa_check_memblks to reject wrong user inputs early
>>> so that we can keep the original numa_meminfo not changed.
>>
>> So, this is another very subtle ordering you're adding without any
>> comment and I'm not sure it even makes sense because the function can
>> fail after that point.

the new numa_emulation will call numa_check_memblks at first before
touch numa_meminfo.
if it fails, numa_meminfo is not touched, so that should not a problem.

>
> Yes, if it fail, we will stay with current numa info from firmware.
> That looks like right behavior.
>
> Before this patch, it will fail to next numa way like if acpi srat + user
> input fail, it will try to go with amd_numa then try apply user info.

For numa emulation fail sequence, want to double check what should be
right seuence:

on and before 2.6.38:
   emulation ==> acpi ==> amd ==> dummy
so if emulation with wrong input, will fall back to acpi numa.

from 2.6.39
   acpi (emulation) ==> amd (emulation) ==> dummy (emulation)
if emulation with wrong input, it will fall back to next numa discovery.

after my patchset
will be acpi ==> amd ==> dummy
          emulation.
the new emulation will call numa_check_memblks at first before touch
numa_meminfo.
anyway if emulation fails, numa_meminfo is not touched.

so this change looks like right change.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
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/