linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] device-dax: use fallback nid when numa

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: <AM6PR08MB43766A114DA6AE971697CA1CF7EB9@AM6PR08MB4376.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:44:10 +0000
From:   Justin He <Justin.He@....com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
CC:     "nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev" <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        nd <nd@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] device-dax: use fallback nid when numa_node is invalid

Hi David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 3:59 PM
> To: Justin He <Justin.He@....com>; Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>;
> Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>; Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> Cc: nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; nd <nd@....com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] device-dax: use fallback nid when numa_node is
> invalid
> 
> Hi Justin,
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >> Note that this patch conflicts with:
> >>
> >> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210723125210.29987-7-david@redhat.com
> >>
> >> But nothing fundamental. Determining a single NID is similar to how I'm
> >> handling it for ACPI:
> >>
> >> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210723125210.29987-6-david@redhat.com
> >>
> >
> > Okay, got it. Thanks for the reminder.
> > Seems my patch is not useful after your patch.
> >
> 
> I think your patch still makes sense. With
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20210723125210.29987-7-
> david@...hat.com/
> 
> We'd have to detect the node id in the first loop instead.

Ok, I got your point. I will do that in v2.

Btw, sorry for commenting there about your patch 06 since I didn't
subscribe lkml via this mailbox.

+	for (i = 0; i < dev_dax->nr_range; i++) {
+		struct range range;
+
+		rc = dax_kmem_range(dev_dax, i, &range);
+		if (rc) {
+			dev_info(dev, "mapping%d: %#llx-%#llx too small after alignment\n",
+					i, range.start, range.end);
+			continue;
+		}
+		total_len += range_len(&range);
+	}
You add an additional loop to get the total_len.
I wonder is it independent on 2nd loop?
If yes, why not merge the 2 loops into one?
Sorry if this question is too simple, I don't know too much
about the background of your patch.


--
Cheers,
Justin (Jia He)