linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] migration/mm: Add WARN_ON to try_offline

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

Date:   Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:14:49 -0500
From:   Michael Bringmann <mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Thomas Falcon <tlfalcon@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Juliet Kim <minkim@...ibm.com>,
        Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        YASUAKI ISHIMATSU <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] migration/mm: Add WARN_ON to try_offline_node

On 10/02/2018 09:59 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-10-18 09:51:40, Michael Bringmann wrote:
> [...]
>> When the device-tree affinity attributes have changed for memory,
>> the 'nid' affinity calculated points to a different node for the
>> memory block than the one used to install it, previously on the
>> source system.  The newly calculated 'nid' affinity may not yet
>> be initialized on the target system.  The current memory tracking
>> mechanisms do not record the node to which a memory block was
>> associated when it was added.  Nathan is looking at adding this
>> feature to the new implementation of LMBs, but it is not there
>> yet, and won't be present in earlier kernels without backporting a
>> significant number of changes.
> 
> Then the patch you have proposed here just papers over a real issue, no?
> IIUC then you simply do not remove the memory if you lose the race.

The problem occurs when removing memory after an affinity change references a node that was previously unreferenced.  Other code in 'kernel/mm/memory_hotplug.c' deals with initializing an empty node when adding memory to a system.  The   'removing memory' case is specific to systems that perform LPM and allow device-tree changes.  The powerpc kernel does not have the option of accepting some PRRN requests and accepting others.  It must perform them all.

The kernel/mm code that removes memory blocks does not (before this patch) recognize that the affinity of a memory block could have changed to a previously unused node.  If every path to try_offline_node made such a check, then this patch would be unnecessary.  However, putting a patch at a single location to check for a relatively rare occurrence, would seem to be a more efficient implementation.

Michael

-- 
Michael W. Bringmann
Linux Technology Center
IBM Corporation
Tie-Line  363-5196
External: (512) 286-5196
Cell:       (512) 466-0650
mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com