linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 2/3] mm/numa: build zonelist when alloc for device on offline node

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:   Thu, 20 Dec 2018 20:26:28 +0800
From:   Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/3] mm/numa: build zonelist when alloc for device on
 offline node

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 7:35 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu 20-12-18 17:50:38, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> [...]
> > @@ -453,7 +456,12 @@ static inline int gfp_zonelist(gfp_t flags)
> >   */
> >  static inline struct zonelist *node_zonelist(int nid, gfp_t flags)
> >  {
> > -     return NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zonelists + gfp_zonelist(flags);
> > +     if (unlikely(!possible_zonelists[nid])) {
> > +             WARN_ONCE(1, "alloc from offline node: %d\n", nid);
> > +             if (unlikely(build_fallback_zonelists(nid)))
> > +                     nid = first_online_node;
> > +     }
> > +     return possible_zonelists[nid] + gfp_zonelist(flags);
> >  }
>
> No, please don't do this. We do not want to make things work magically

For magically, if you mean directly replies on zonelist instead of on
pgdat struct, then it is easy to change
> and we definitely do not want to put something like that into the hot

But  the cose of "unlikely" can be ignored, why can it not be placed
in the path?
> path. We definitely need zonelists to be build transparently for all
> possible nodes during the init time.

That is the point, whether the all nodes should be instanced at boot
time, or not be instanced until there is requirement.

To replace the possible_zonelists, I bring out the following draft
(locking issue is not considered)
diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
index 0705164..24e8ae6 100644
--- a/include/linux/gfp.h
+++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
@@ -453,6 +453,11 @@ static inline int gfp_zonelist(gfp_t flags)
  */
 static inline struct zonelist *node_zonelist(int nid, gfp_t flags)
 {
+       if (unlikely(!node_data[nid])) {
+               WARN_ONCE(1, "alloc from offline node: %d\n", nid);
+               if (unlikely(build_offline_node(nid)))
+                       nid = first_online_node;
+       }
        return NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zonelists + gfp_zonelist(flags);
 }

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 2ec9cc4..4ef15fc 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -5261,6 +5261,21 @@ static void build_zonelists(pg_data_t *pgdat)
        build_thisnode_zonelists(pgdat);
 }

+int build_offline_node(int nid)
+{
+       unsigned long zones_size[MAX_NR_ZONES] = {0};
+       unsigned long zholes_size[MAX_NR_ZONES] = {0};
+       pg_data_t *pgdat;
+
+       pgdat = kzalloc(sizeof(pg_data_t), GFP_ATOMIC);
+       if (!pgdat)
+               return -ENOMEM
+       node_data[nid] = pgdat;
+       free_area_init_node(nid, zones_size, 0, zholes_size);
+       build_zonelists(pgdat);
+       return 0;
+}
+

Thanks and regards,
Pingfan