[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160331140124.481acb67ef8f7356778cc4a0@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:01:24 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>, zhuhui@...omi.com,
wangxq10@....edu.cn, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix invalid node in alloc_migrate_target()
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:13:41 +0200 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
> On 03/29/2016 03:06 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 03/25/2016 08:22 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> Also, mm/mempolicy.c:offset_il_node() worries me:
> >>
> >> do {
> >> nid = next_node(nid, pol->v.nodes);
> >> c++;
> >> } while (c <= target);
> >>
> >> Can't `nid' hit MAX_NUMNODES?
> >
> > AFAICS it can. interleave_nid() uses this and the nid is then used e.g.
> > in node_zonelist() where it's used for NODE_DATA(nid). That's quite
> > scary. It also predates git. Why don't we see crashes or KASAN finding this?
>
> Ah, I see. In offset_il_node(), nid is initialized to -1, and the number
> of do-while iterations calling next_node() is up to the number of bits
> set in the pol->v.nodes bitmap, so it can't reach past the last set bit
> and return MAX_NUMNODES.
Gack. offset_il_node() should be dragged out, strangled, shot then burnt.
static unsigned offset_il_node(struct mempolicy *pol,
struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long off)
{
unsigned nnodes = nodes_weight(pol->v.nodes);
unsigned target;
int c;
int nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
if (!nnodes)
return numa_node_id();
target = (unsigned int)off % nnodes;
c = 0;
do {
nid = next_node(nid, pol->v.nodes);
c++;
} while (c <= target);
return nid;
}
For starters it is relying upon next_node(-1, ...) behaving like
first_node(). Fair enough I guess, but that isn't very clear.
static inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp)
{
return min_t(int,MAX_NUMNODES,find_next_bit(srcp->bits, MAX_NUMNODES, n+1));
}
will start from node 0 when it does the n+1.
Also it is relying upon NUMA_NO_NODE having a value of -1. That's just
grubby - this code shouldn't "know" that NUMA_NO_NODE==-1. It would have
been better to use plain old "-1" here.
Does this look clearer and correct?
/*
* Do static interleaving for a VMA with known offset @n. Returns the n'th
* node in pol->v.nodes (starting from n=0), wrapping around if n exceeds the
* number of present nodes.
*/
static unsigned offset_il_node(struct mempolicy *pol,
struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long n)
{
unsigned nnodes = nodes_weight(pol->v.nodes);
unsigned target;
int i;
int nid;
if (!nnodes)
return numa_node_id();
target = (unsigned int)n % nnodes;
nid = first_node(pol->v.nodes);
for (i = 0; i < target; i++)
nid = next_node(nid, pol->v.nodes);
return nid;
}
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: mm/mempolicy.c:offset_il_node() document and clarify
This code was pretty obscure and was relying upon obscure side-effects of
next_node(-1, ...) and was relying upon NUMA_NO_NODE being equal to -1.
Clean that all up and document the function's intent.
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc: Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
---
mm/mempolicy.c | 20 +++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/mempolicy.c~mm-mempolicyc-offset_il_node-document-and-clarify mm/mempolicy.c
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c~mm-mempolicyc-offset_il_node-document-and-clarify
+++ a/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1763,23 +1763,25 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void)
}
}
-/* Do static interleaving for a VMA with known offset. */
+/*
+ * Do static interleaving for a VMA with known offset @n. Returns the n'th
+ * node in pol->v.nodes (starting from n=0), wrapping around if n exceeds the
+ * number of present nodes.
+ */
static unsigned offset_il_node(struct mempolicy *pol,
- struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long off)
+ struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long n)
{
unsigned nnodes = nodes_weight(pol->v.nodes);
unsigned target;
- int c;
- int nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
+ int i;
+ int nid;
if (!nnodes)
return numa_node_id();
- target = (unsigned int)off % nnodes;
- c = 0;
- do {
+ target = (unsigned int)n % nnodes;
+ nid = first_node(pol->v.nodes);
+ for (i = 0; i < target; i++)
nid = next_node(nid, pol->v.nodes);
- c++;
- } while (c <= target);
return nid;
}
_
Powered by blists - more mailing lists