linux-kernel - Re: crash in kmem_cache

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:	Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:57:22 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
cc:	Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	hanth Aravamudan <nacc@...ibm.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	lee.schermerhorn@...com, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: crash in kmem_cache_init

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Mel Gorman wrote:

> > > Whatever this was a problem fixed in the past or not, it's broken again now
> > > :( . It's possible that there is a __GFP_THISNODE that can be dropped early
> > > at boot-time that would also fix this problem in a way that doesn't
> > > affect runtime (like altering cache_grow in my patch does).
> > 
> > The dropping of GFP_THISNODE has the same effect as your patch. 
> 
> The dropping of it totally? If so, this patch might fix a boot but it'll
> potentially be a performance regression on NUMA machines that only have
> nodes with memory, right?

No the dropping during early allocations.,

> o 0
> o 2
> Nodes with regular memory
> o 2
> Current running CPU 0 is associated with node 0
> Current node is 0
> 
> So node 2 has regular memory but it's trying to use node 0 at a glance.
> I've attached the patch I used against 2.6.24-rc8. It includes the revert.

We need the current processor to be attached to a node that has 
memory. We cannot fall back that early because the structures for the 
other nodes do not exist yet.

> Online nodes
> o 0
> o 2
> Nodes with regular memory
> o 2
> Current running CPU 0 is associated with node 0
> Current node is 0
>  o kmem_list3_init

This needs to be node 2.

> [c0000000005c3b40] c0000000000dadec .cache_grow+0x7c/0x338
> [c0000000005c3c00] c0000000000db54c .fallback_alloc+0x1c0/0x224

Fallback during bootstrap.

--
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/