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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190527111152.16324-11-david@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 May 2019 13:11:51 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
        Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 10/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail

We really don't want anything during memory hotunplug to fail.
We always pass a valid memory block device, that check can go. Avoid
allocating memory and eventually failing. As we are always called under
lock, we can use a static piece of memory. This avoids having to put
the structure onto the stack, having to guess about the stack size
of callers.

Patch inspired by a patch from Oscar Salvador.

In the future, there might be no need to iterate over nodes at all.
mem->nid should tell us exactly what to remove. Memory block devices
with mixed nodes (added during boot) should properly fenced off and never
removed.

Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
---
 drivers/base/node.c  | 18 +++++-------------
 include/linux/node.h |  5 ++---
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
index 04fdfa99b8bc..9be88fd05147 100644
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -803,20 +803,14 @@ int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, void *arg)
 
 /*
  * Unregister memory block device under all nodes that it spans.
+ * Has to be called with mem_sysfs_mutex held (due to unlinked_nodes).
  */
-int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
 {
-	NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL);
 	unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn;
+	static nodemask_t unlinked_nodes;
 
-	if (!mem_blk) {
-		NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
-		return -EFAULT;
-	}
-	if (!unlinked_nodes)
-		return -ENOMEM;
-	nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes);
-
+	nodes_clear(unlinked_nodes);
 	sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr);
 	sect_end_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->end_section_nr);
 	for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
@@ -827,15 +821,13 @@ int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
 			continue;
 		if (!node_online(nid))
 			continue;
-		if (node_test_and_set(nid, *unlinked_nodes))
+		if (node_test_and_set(nid, unlinked_nodes))
 			continue;
 		sysfs_remove_link(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj,
 			 kobject_name(&mem_blk->dev.kobj));
 		sysfs_remove_link(&mem_blk->dev.kobj,
 			 kobject_name(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj));
 	}
-	NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
-	return 0;
 }
 
 int link_mem_sections(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
diff --git a/include/linux/node.h b/include/linux/node.h
index 02a29e71b175..548c226966a2 100644
--- a/include/linux/node.h
+++ b/include/linux/node.h
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ extern int register_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
 extern int unregister_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
 extern int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
 						void *arg);
-extern int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
+extern void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
 
 extern int register_memory_node_under_compute_node(unsigned int mem_nid,
 						   unsigned int cpu_nid,
@@ -175,9 +175,8 @@ static inline int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
 {
 	return 0;
 }
-static inline int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+static inline void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
 {
-	return 0;
 }
 
 static inline void register_hugetlbfs_with_node(node_registration_func_t reg,
-- 
2.20.1

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ