linux-kernel - [PATCH v5 16/22] x86, mm, numa: Move 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]

Message-Id: <1371257800-11720-17-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org>
Date:	Fri, 14 Jun 2013 17:56:34 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 16/22] x86, mm, numa: Move emulation handling down.

It needs to allocate buffer for new numa_meminfo and distance matrix,
so move it down.

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 from probing before, like acpi srat or amd_numa.

We need to call numa_check_memblks to reject wrong user inputs early,
so keep the original numa_meminfo not changed.

Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Tested-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c           | 6 +++---
 arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c | 2 +-
 arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h  | 2 ++
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index da2ebab..3254f22 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ static unsigned long __init node_map_pfn_alignment(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 }
 #endif
 
-static int __init numa_check_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
+int __init numa_check_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 {
 	nodemask_t nodes_parsed;
 	unsigned long pfn_align;
@@ -604,8 +604,6 @@ static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
 
-	numa_emulation(&numa_meminfo, numa_distance_cnt);
-
 	ret = numa_check_memblks(&numa_meminfo);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
@@ -669,6 +667,8 @@ void __init x86_numa_init(void)
 
 	early_x86_numa_init();
 
+	numa_emulation(&numa_meminfo, numa_distance_cnt);
+
 	node_possible_map = numa_nodes_parsed;
 	numa_nodemask_from_meminfo(&node_possible_map, mi);
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
index dbbbb47..5a0433d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_emulation.c
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo, int numa_dist_cnt)
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto no_emu;
 
-	if (numa_cleanup_meminfo(&ei) < 0) {
+	if (numa_cleanup_meminfo(&ei) < 0 || numa_check_memblks(&ei) < 0) {
 		pr_warning("NUMA: Warning: constructed meminfo invalid, disabling emulation\n");
 		goto no_emu;
 	}
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h b/arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h
index ad86ec9..bb2fbcc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h
@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ void __init numa_reset_distance(void);
 
 void __init x86_numa_init(void);
 
+int __init numa_check_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi);
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_EMU
 void __init numa_emulation(struct numa_meminfo *numa_meminfo,
 			   int numa_dist_cnt);
-- 
1.8.1.4

--
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/