linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] net: Avoid allocing memory on memoryless numa 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b77011b20e85434e8e5135ea1c0f51ac@h3c.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 00:14:39 +0000
From:   Tianxianting <tian.xianting@....com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] net: Avoid allocing memory on memoryless numa node

Hi Jakub,
Thanks for your suggestion,
Let me try it :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Jakub Kicinski [mailto:kuba@...nel.org] 
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 3:18 AM
To: tianxianting (RD) <tian.xianting@....com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Avoid allocing memory on memoryless numa node

On Sun, 11 Oct 2020 12:11:40 +0800 Xianting Tian wrote:
> In architecture like powerpc, we can have cpus without any local 
> memory attached to it. In such cases the node does not have real memory.
> 
> Use local_memory_node(), which is guaranteed to have memory.
> local_memory_node is a noop in other architectures that does not 
> support memoryless nodes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xianting Tian <tian.xianting@....com>
> ---
>  net/core/dev.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c index 
> 266073e30..dcb4533ef 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -2590,7 +2590,7 @@ static struct xps_map *expand_xps_map(struct xps_map *map, int attr_index,
>  		new_map = kzalloc(XPS_MAP_SIZE(alloc_len), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	else
>  		new_map = kzalloc_node(XPS_MAP_SIZE(alloc_len), GFP_KERNEL,
> -				       cpu_to_node(attr_index));
> +				       local_memory_node(cpu_to_node(attr_index)));
>  	if (!new_map)
>  		return NULL;
>  

Are we going to patch all kmalloc_node() callers now to apply local_memory_node()?  Can't the allocator take care of this?