linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO

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: <20191030113328.GA31513@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 30 Oct 2019 12:33:28 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>, catalin.marinas@....com,
        will@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, rth@...ddle.net,
        ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@...il.com,
        benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
        borntraeger@...ibm.com, ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp,
        dalias@...c.org, davem@...emloft.net, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
        paul.burton@...s.com, jhogan@...nel.org, jiaxun.yang@...goat.com,
        chenhc@...ote.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
        anshuman.khandual@....com, tglx@...utronix.de, cai@....pw,
        robin.murphy@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org, len.brown@...el.com,
        axboe@...nel.dk, dledford@...hat.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
        linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, tbogendoerfer@...e.de,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware

On Wed 30-10-19 11:28:00, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:22:29AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 30-10-19 11:14:49, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:34:28PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> > > > When passing the return value of dev_to_node() to cpumask_of_node()
> > > > without checking if the device's node id is NUMA_NO_NODE, there is
> > > > global-out-of-bounds detected by KASAN.
> > > > 
> > > > From the discussion [1], NUMA_NO_NODE really means no node affinity,
> > > > which also means all cpus should be usable. So the cpumask_of_node()
> > > > should always return all cpus online when user passes the node id as
> > > > NUMA_NO_NODE, just like similar semantic that page allocator handles
> > > > NUMA_NO_NODE.
> > > > 
> > > > But we cannot really copy the page allocator logic. Simply because the
> > > > page allocator doesn't enforce the near node affinity. It just picks it
> > > > up as a preferred node but then it is free to fallback to any other numa
> > > > node. This is not the case here and node_to_cpumask_map will only restrict
> > > > to the particular node's cpus which would have really non deterministic
> > > > behavior depending on where the code is executed. So in fact we really
> > > > want to return cpu_online_mask for NUMA_NO_NODE.
> > > > 
> > > > Also there is a debugging version of node_to_cpumask_map() for x86 and
> > > > arm64, which is only used when CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is defined, this
> > > > patch changes it to handle NUMA_NO_NODE as normal node_to_cpumask_map().
> > > > 
> > > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/11/66
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
> > > > Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
> > > > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com> # MIPS bits
> > > 
> > > Still:
> > > 
> > > Nacked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > 
> > Do you have any other proposal that doesn't make any wild guesses about
> > which node to use instead of the undefined one?
> 
> It only makes 'wild' guesses when the BIOS is shit and it complains
> about that.

I really do not see how this is any better than simply using the online
cpu mask in the same "broken" situation. We are effectivelly talking
about a suboptimal path for suboptimal setups. I haven't heard any
actual technical argument why cpu_online_mask is any worse than adding
some sort of failover guessing which node to use as a replacement.

I completely do you point about complaining loud about broken BIOS/fw.
It seems we just disagree where we should workaround those issues
because as of now we simply do generate semi random behavior because of
an uninitialized memory access.

> Or do you like you BIOS broken?

I do not see anything like that in my response nor in my previous
communication. Moreover a patch to warn about this should be on the way
to get merged AFAIK.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs