linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] acpi/hmat: Skip publishing target info for nodes with no online memory

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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:23:28 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] acpi/hmat: Skip publishing target info for nodes with
 no online memory

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 5:29 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 2:05 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, August 12, 2019 10:59:58 AM CEST Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 4:30 PM Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > > >
> > > > There are multiple scenarios where the HMAT may contain information
> > > > about proximity domains that are not currently online. Rather than fail
> > > > to report any HMAT data just elide those offline domains.
> > > >
> > > > If and when those domains are later onlined they can be added to the
> > > > HMEM reporting at that point.
> > > >
> > > > This was found while testing EFI_MEMORY_SP support which reserves
> > > > "specific purpose" memory from the general allocation pool. If that
> > > > reservation results in an empty numa-node then the node is not marked
> > > > online leading a spurious:
> > > >
> > > >     "acpi/hmat: Ignoring HMAT: Invalid table"
> > > >
> > > > ...result for HMAT parsing.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > >
> > > When you send somebody else's patches, you should sign them off as a
> > > rule, but since you sent this one with your own R-by, I converted that
> > > to a S-o-b.
> > >
> >
> > And all patches in the series have been applied.
>
> I want to flag this patch (commit 5c7ed4385424 "HMAT: Skip publishing
> target info for nodes with no online memory")
> for -stable to cleanup a spurious WARN_ON:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 1 at drivers/base/node.c:191 node_set_perf_attrs+0x90/0xa0
> CPU: 7 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.3.6-100.fc29.x86_64 #1
> RIP: 0010:node_set_perf_attrs+0x90/0xa0
> Call Trace:
>  ? do_early_param+0x8e/0x8e
>  hmat_init+0x2ff/0x443
>  ? hmat_parse_subtable+0x55a/0x55a
>  ? do_early_param+0x8e/0x8e
>  do_one_initcall+0x46/0x1f4
>
> Do you mind if I forward to stable@, or do you collect ACPI patches to
> send to stable@?

Please forward it, thanks!