linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Allow GIC ITS number more than MAX

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 22 Jul 2017 11:52:37 +0800
From:   Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
To:     Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gklkml16@...il.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
CC:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
        Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <Jayachandran.Nair@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Allow GIC ITS number more than
 MAX_NUMNODES

On 2017/7/21 19:42, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> Hi Hanjun,
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com> wrote:
>> On 21/07/17 11:06, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2017/7/21 17:51, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
>>>>
>>>> When running 4.13-rc1 on top of D05, I got the boot log:
>>>>
>>>> [    0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> ITS 0 -> Node 0
>>>> [    0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> ITS 1 -> Node 0
>>>> [    0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> ITS 2 -> Node 0
>>>> [    0.000000] SRAT: PXM 1 -> ITS 3 -> Node 1
>>>> [    0.000000] SRAT: ITS affinity exceeding max count[4]
>>>>
>>>> This is wrong on D05 as we have 8 ITSes with 4 NUMA nodes.
> Used static array to keep it simple.  we can have either dynamic array
> or increase static array size (which is in init data) to a larger
> number.
> We may have to go for dynamic array to be more sane. You can refer my
> v2 patch [1], which was doing dynamic allocation and avoids
> 2 calls to acpi parser as done in this patch.
>
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9798659/

Hmm, although scanning the SRAT twice is bad, it will keep the
code simple, and no need to alloc the memory every time when we
find a ITS affinity entry, you need to free that memory when
ITS probing is done.

I will post a patch later, please take a look if it's ok to you :)

Thanks
Hanjun