linux-kernel - Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

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: <513091C5.2010109@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:32:21 +0800
From:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Don Morris <don.morris@...com>,
	Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

On 03/01/2013 03:43 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Please check attached patches.
>
> Plan A. revert all 8 patches:
>      revert_movablemem_map.patch
>
> Plan B. fix movablemem_map:
>      kill_max_low_pfn_mapped.patch and fix_movablemem_map.patch
>
> fix_movablemem_map.patch is too risky, and need more test.
>

Hi Yinghai,

In your Plan B, you allocated pgdat on local node, right ?

-    nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
+    nd_pa = memblock_find_in_range_node(start, end, nd_size,
+                     SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);  ---------------- Here, 
right ?

Without movablemem_map, pgdat will be allocated successfully on local 
node, right ?

If so, this will prevent node hot-plug, because as mentioned by 
Kamezawa, there is
no way to ensure pgdat is not used by others on stack.

I do hope you can stop putting pgdat and zone on local node for now. And 
improve it
in the future.

And I also hope you can apply my revert SRAT patch first, and then do 
your work.
It will seem more clean to me.

Thanks. :)
--
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/