| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 08:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>
To: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <hpa@...or.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<tj@...nel.org>, <dyoung@...hat.com>,
<isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>, <lcapitulino@...hat.com>,
<will.deacon@....com>, <tony.luck@...el.com>,
<vladimir.murzin@....com>, <fabf@...net.be>,
<kuleshovmail@...il.com>, <bhe@...hat.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mem-hotplug: Handle node hole when initializing
numa_meminfo.
Hi Tang,
> On my box, if I run lscpu, the output looks like this:
>
> NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-14,128-142
> NUMA node1 CPU(s): 15-29,143-157
> NUMA node2 CPU(s):
> NUMA node3 CPU(s):
> NUMA node4 CPU(s): 62-76,190-204
> NUMA node5 CPU(s): 78-92,206-220
>
> Node 2 and 3 are not exist, but they are online.
According your description of patch, node 4 and 5 are mistakenly
set to online. Why does lscpu show the above result?
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
On Wed, 1 Jul 2015 15:55:30 +0800
Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> On 07/01/2015 02:25 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> > On 2015/7/1 11:16, Tang Chen wrote:
> >
> >> When parsing SRAT, all memory ranges are added into numa_meminfo.
> >> In numa_init(), before entering numa_cleanup_meminfo(), all possible
> >> memory ranges are in numa_meminfo. And numa_cleanup_meminfo() removes
> >> all ranges over max_pfn or empty.
> >>
> >> But, this only works if the nodes are continuous. Let's have a look
> >> at the following example:
> >>
> >> We have an SRAT like this:
> >> SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x5fffffff]
> >> SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x100000000-0x1ffffffffff]
> >> SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 [mem 0x20000000000-0x3ffffffffff]
> >> SRAT: Node 4 PXM 2 [mem 0x40000000000-0x5ffffffffff] hotplug
> >> SRAT: Node 5 PXM 3 [mem 0x60000000000-0x7ffffffffff] hotplug
> >> SRAT: Node 2 PXM 4 [mem 0x80000000000-0x9ffffffffff] hotplug
> >> SRAT: Node 3 PXM 5 [mem 0xa0000000000-0xbffffffffff] hotplug
> >> SRAT: Node 6 PXM 6 [mem 0xc0000000000-0xdffffffffff] hotplug
> >> SRAT: Node 7 PXM 7 [mem 0xe0000000000-0xfffffffffff] hotplug
> >>
> >> On boot, only node 0,1,2,3 exist.
> >>
> >> And the numa_meminfo will look like this:
> >> numa_meminfo.nr_blks = 9
> >> 1. on node 0: [0, 60000000]
> >> 2. on node 0: [100000000, 20000000000]
> >> 3. on node 1: [20000000000, 40000000000]
> >> 4. on node 4: [40000000000, 60000000000]
> >> 5. on node 5: [60000000000, 80000000000]
> >> 6. on node 2: [80000000000, a0000000000]
> >> 7. on node 3: [a0000000000, a0800000000]
> >> 8. on node 6: [c0000000000, a0800000000]
> >> 9. on node 7: [e0000000000, a0800000000]
> >>
> >> And numa_cleanup_meminfo() will merge 1 and 2, and remove 8,9 because
> >> the end address is over max_pfn, which is a0800000000. But 4 and 5
> >> are not removed because their end addresses are less then max_pfn.
> >> But in fact, node 4 and 5 don't exist.
> >>
> >> In a word, numa_cleanup_meminfo() is not able to handle holes between nodes.
> >>
> >> Since memory ranges in node 4 and 5 are in numa_meminfo, in numa_register_memblks(),
> >> node 4 and 5 will be mistakenly set to online.
> >>
> >> In this patch, we use memblock_overlaps_region() to check if ranges in
> >> numa_meminfo overlap with ranges in memory_block. Since memory_block contains
> >> all available memory at boot time, if they overlap, it means the ranges
> >> exist. If not, then remove them from numa_meminfo.
> >>
> > Hi Tang Chen,
> >
> > What's the impact of this problem?
> >
> > Command "numactl --hard" will show an empty node(no cpu and no memory,
> > but pgdat is created), right?
>
> On my box, if I run lscpu, the output looks like this:
>
> NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-14,128-142
> NUMA node1 CPU(s): 15-29,143-157
> NUMA node2 CPU(s):
> NUMA node3 CPU(s):
> NUMA node4 CPU(s): 62-76,190-204
> NUMA node5 CPU(s): 78-92,206-220
>
> Node 2 and 3 are not exist, but they are online.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Xishi Qiu
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 6 ++++--
> >> include/linux/memblock.h | 2 ++
> >> mm/memblock.c | 2 +-
> >> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> >> index 4053bb5..0c55cc5 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> >> @@ -246,8 +246,10 @@ int __init numa_cleanup_meminfo(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
> >> bi->start = max(bi->start, low);
> >> bi->end = min(bi->end, high);
> >>
> >> - /* and there's no empty block */
> >> - if (bi->start >= bi->end)
> >> + /* and there's no empty or non-exist block */
> >> + if (bi->start >= bi->end ||
> >> + memblock_overlaps_region(&memblock.memory,
> >> + bi->start, bi->end - bi->start) == -1)
> >> numa_remove_memblk_from(i--, mi);
> >> }
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> >> index 0215ffd..3bf6cc1 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> >> @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ int memblock_remove(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> int memblock_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> int memblock_reserve(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> void memblock_trim_memory(phys_addr_t align);
> >> +long memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type,
> >> + phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> int memblock_mark_hotplug(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> int memblock_clear_hotplug(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> int memblock_mark_mirror(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> >> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> >> index 1b444c7..55b5f9f 100644
> >> --- a/mm/memblock.c
> >> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> >> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static unsigned long __init_memblock memblock_addrs_overlap(phys_addr_t base1, p
> >> return ((base1 < (base2 + size2)) && (base2 < (base1 + size1)));
> >> }
> >>
> >> -static long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type,
> >> +long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type,
> >> phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
> >> {
> >> unsigned long i;
> >
> >
> > .
> >
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists