linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 03/16] of/numa: add nid check for memory block

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:   Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:40:51 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@...wei.com>,
        Tianhong Ding <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
        Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 03/16] of/numa: add nid check for memory block

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com> wrote:
> If the numa-id which was configured in memory@ devicetree node is greater
> than MAX_NUMNODES, we should report a warning. We have done this for cpus
> and distance-map dt nodes, this patch help them to be consistent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/of/of_numa.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_numa.c b/drivers/of/of_numa.c
> index 7b3fbdc..c1bd62c 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/of_numa.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/of_numa.c
> @@ -75,6 +75,11 @@ static int __init of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(void)
>                          */
>                         continue;
>
> +               if (nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
> +                       pr_warn("NUMA: Node id %u exceeds maximum value\n", nid);

Really using pr_fmt should come first so you're not changing this
line. But not worth respinning for that:

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>

Rob