linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] hugetlb: Fix wrong use of nr_online

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220413150422.e4fc3bda48a285bf7bdc5587@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 15:04:22 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "liupeng (DM)" <liupeng256@...wei.com>
Cc:     <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, <david@...hat.com>,
        <yaozhenguo1@...il.com>, <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        <songmuchun@...edance.com>, <liuyuntao10@...wei.com>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] hugetlb: Fix wrong use of nr_online_nodes

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 14:27:54 +0800 "liupeng (DM)" <liupeng256@...wei.com> wrote:

> 
> On 2022/4/13 12:42, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 03:29:12 +0000 Peng Liu<liupeng256@...wei.com>  wrote:
> >
> >> Certain systems are designed to have sparse/discontiguous nodes. In
> >> this case, nr_online_nodes can not be used to walk through numa node.
> >> Also, a valid node may be greater than nr_online_nodes.
> >>
> >> However, in hugetlb, it is assumed that nodes are contiguous. Recheck
> >> all the places that use nr_online_nodes, and repair them one by one.
> >>
> > What are the runtime effects of this shortcoming?
> > .
> 
> For sparse/discontiguous nodes, the current code may treat a valid node
> as invalid, and will fail to allocate all hugepages on a valid node that
> "nid >= nr_online_nodes".
> 
> As David suggested:
> if (tmp >= nr_online_nodes)
> 	goto invalid;
> 
> Just imagine node 0 and node 2 are online, and node 1 is offline. Assuming
> that "node < 2" is valid is wrong.

So do you think we should backport thtis fix into earlier kernel releases?