linux-kernel - [RESEND] x86/numa: move setting parsed numa node to num_add

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1512123232-7263-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Dec 2017 18:13:52 +0800
From:   zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
To:     <mhocko@...nel.org>, <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, <minchan@...nel.org>,
        <vbabka@...e.cz>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: [RESEND] x86/numa: move setting parsed numa node to num_add_memblk

The acpi table are very much like user input. it is likely to
introduce some unreasonable node in some architecture. but
they do not ingore the node and bail out in time. it will result
in unnecessary print.
e.g  x86:  start is equal to end is a unreasonable node.
numa_blk_memblk will fails but return 0.

meanwhile, Arm64 node will double set it to "numa_node_parsed"
after NUMA adds a memblk successfully.  but X86 is not. because
numa_add_memblk is not set in X86.

In view of the above problems. I think it need a better improvement.
we add a check here for bypassing the invalid memblk node.

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