linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] x86, numa: always initialize all possible nodes

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]

Message-ID: <20190211134909.GA107845@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 14:49:09 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86, numa: always initialize all possible nodes


* Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Thu 24-01-19 11:10:50, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 1/24/19 6:17 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > and nr_cpus set to 4. The underlying reason is tha the device is bound
> > > to node 2 which doesn't have any memory and init_cpu_to_node only
> > > initializes memory-less nodes for possible cpus which nr_cpus restrics.
> > > This in turn means that proper zonelists are not allocated and the page
> > > allocator blows up.
> > 
> > This looks OK to me.
> > 
> > Could we add a few DEBUG_VM checks that *look* for these invalid
> > zonelists?  Or, would our existing list debugging have caught this?
> 
> Currently we simply blow up because those zonelists are NULL. I do not
> think we have a way to check whether an existing zonelist is actually 
> _correct_ other thatn check it for NULL. But what would we do in the
> later case?
> 
> > Basically, is this bug also a sign that we need better debugging around
> > this?
> 
> My earlier patch had a debugging printk to display the zonelists and
> that might be worthwhile I guess. Basically something like this
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 2e097f336126..c30d59f803fb 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -5259,6 +5259,11 @@ static void build_zonelists(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>  
>  	build_zonelists_in_node_order(pgdat, node_order, nr_nodes);
>  	build_thisnode_zonelists(pgdat);
> +
> +	pr_info("node[%d] zonelist: ", pgdat->node_id);
> +	for_each_zone_zonelist(zone, z, &pgdat->node_zonelists[ZONELIST_FALLBACK], MAX_NR_ZONES-1)
> +		pr_cont("%d:%s ", zone_to_nid(zone), zone->name);
> +	pr_cont("\n");
>  }

Looks like this patch fell through the cracks - any update on this?

Thanks,

	Ingo