linux-kernel - Re: Regression in 2.6.23-rc2-mm2, mounting cpusets causes a hang

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708151333230.7628@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, bob.picco@...com,
	nacc@...ibm.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, mel@...net.ie,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ckrm-tech <ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: Regression in 2.6.23-rc2-mm2, mounting cpusets causes a hang

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:

> > So its always true for node 0. The "bit" is set.
> 
> The issue is with the N_*_MEMORY masks.  They don't get initialized
> properly because node_set_state() is a no-op if !NUMA.  So, where we
> look for intersections with or where we AND with the N_*_MEMORY masks we
> get the empty set.

That is intentional. Memory is always present if you are on !NUMA. You can 
simply use a default nodemask where only node 0 is set. That is what the 
fallback provides. Maybe it does not provide the right thing for cpusets?

> > We are trying to get cpusets to work with !NUMA?
> 
> Well, yes.  In Serge's case, he's trying to use cpusets with !NUMA.
> He'll have to comment on the reasons for that.  Looking at all of the
> #ifdefs and init/Kconfig, CPUSET does not depend on NUMA--only SMP and
> CONTAINERS [altho' methinks CPUSET should select CONTAINERS rather than
> depend on it...].  So, you can use cpusets to partition of cpus in
> non-NUMA configs.

Looks like we need to fix cpuset nodemasks for the !NUMA case then?
It cannot expect to find valid nodemasks if !NUMA.

> In the more general case, tho', I'm looking at all uses of the
> node_online_map and for_each_online_node, for instances where they
> should be replaced with one of the *_MEMORY masks.  IMO, generic code
> that is compiled independent of any CONFIG option, like NUMA,  should
> just work, independent of the config.  Currently, as Serge has shown,

AFAIK this works except for cpusets.

> this is not the case.  So, I think we should fix the *_MEMORY maps to be
> correctly populated in both the NUMA and !NUMA cases.  A couple of
> options:

There is no point in having a variable if you know the results because of 
!NUMA. That is the way nodemask.h has always operated.

> Thoughts?

Lets get either rid of the definitions for the nodemasks in the !NUMA 
case or fix their contents to have the right constant value expected in 
cpusets.

-
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/