linux-kernel - Re: Panic on 8-node system in memblock_virt_alloc_try

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: <52E20A56.1000507@ti.com>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jan 2014 01:38:14 -0500
From:	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Panic on 8-node system in memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid()

Yinghai,

On Friday 24 January 2014 12:55 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>> > Linus's current tree doesn't boot on an 8-node/1TB NUMA system that I
>> > have.  Its reboots are *LONG*, so I haven't fully bisected it, but it's
>> > down to a just a few commits, most of which are changes to the memblock
>> > code.  Since the panic is in the memblock code, it looks like a
>> > no-brainer.  It's almost certainly the code from Santosh or Grygorii
>> > that's triggering this.
>> >
>> > Config and good/bad dmesg with memblock=debug are here:
>> >
>> >         http://sr71.net/~dave/intel/3.13/
>> >
>> > Please let me know if you need it bisected further than this.
> Please check attached patch, and it should fix the problem.
> 

[...]

> 
> Subject: [PATCH] x86: Fix numa with reverting wrong memblock setting.
> 
> Dave reported Numa on x86 is broken on system with 1T memory.
> 
> It turns out
> | commit 5b6e529521d35e1bcaa0fe43456d1bbb335cae5d
> | Author: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
> | Date:   Tue Jan 21 15:50:03 2014 -0800
> |
> |    x86: memblock: set current limit to max low memory address
> 
> set limit to low wrongly.
> 
> max_low_pfn_mapped is different from max_pfn_mapped.
> max_low_pfn_mapped is always under 4G.
> 
> That will memblock_alloc_nid all go under 4G.
> 
> Revert that offending patch.
> 
> Reported-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> 
>
This mostly will fix the $subject issue but the regression 
reported by Andrew [1] will surface with the revert. Its clear
now that even though commit fixed the issue, it wasn't the fix.

Would be great if you can have a look at the thread.

Regards,
Santosh

[1] http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1312.1/03770.html
--
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/