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  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]
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:03:28 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org,
        lenb@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, richard.weiyang@...il.com,
        pombredanne@...b.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/numa: move setting parse numa node to num_add_memblk

On Wed 29-11-17 17:13:27, zhong jiang wrote:
> Currently, Arm64 and x86 use the common code wehn parsing numa node
> in a acpi way. The arm64 will set the parsed node in numa_add_memblk,
> but the x86 is not set in that , then it will result in the repeatly
> setting. And the parsed node maybe is  unreasonable to the system.
> 
> we would better not set it although it also still works. because the
> parsed node is unresonable. so we should skip related operate in this
> node. This patch just set node in various architecture individually.
> it is no functional change.

I really have hard time to understand what you try to say above. Could
you start by the problem description and then how you are addressing it?

> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c | 1 -
>  arch/x86/mm/numa.c        | 3 ++-
>  drivers/acpi/numa.c       | 5 ++++-
>  3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c b/arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c
> index 91f501b..7657042 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c
> @@ -151,7 +151,6 @@ int __init amd_numa_init(void)
>  
>  		prevbase = base;
>  		numa_add_memblk(nodeid, base, limit);
> -		node_set(nodeid, numa_nodes_parsed);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!nodes_weight(numa_nodes_parsed))
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> index 25504d5..8f87f26 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ static int __init numa_add_memblk_to(int nid, u64 start, u64 end,
>  	mi->blk[mi->nr_blks].end = end;
>  	mi->blk[mi->nr_blks].nid = nid;
>  	mi->nr_blks++;
> +
> +	node_set(nid, numa_nodes_parsed);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -693,7 +695,6 @@ static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>  	printk(KERN_INFO "Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n",
>  	       0LLU, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn) - 1);
>  
> -	node_set(0, numa_nodes_parsed);
>  	numa_add_memblk(0, 0, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn));
>  
>  	return 0;
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> index 917f1cc..f2e33cb 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> @@ -294,7 +294,9 @@ void __init acpi_numa_slit_init(struct acpi_table_slit *slit)
>  		goto out_err_bad_srat;
>  	}
>  
> -	node_set(node, numa_nodes_parsed);
> +	/* some architecture is likely to ignore a unreasonable node */
> +	if (!node_isset(node, numa_nodes_parsed))
> +		goto out;
>  
>  	pr_info("SRAT: Node %u PXM %u [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]%s%s\n",
>  		node, pxm,
> @@ -309,6 +311,7 @@ void __init acpi_numa_slit_init(struct acpi_table_slit *slit)
>  
>  	max_possible_pfn = max(max_possible_pfn, PFN_UP(end - 1));
>  
> +out:
>  	return 0;
>  out_err_bad_srat:
>  	bad_srat();
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists