[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2a6087e-145e-3f79-c93b-c510854e66ca@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 16:36:12 -0700
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To: Peng Liu <liupeng256@...wei.com>, david@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 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 4/12/22 20:29, Peng Liu 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.
>
> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> Fixes: 4178158ef8ca ("hugetlbfs: fix issue of preallocation of gigantic pages can't work")
> Fixes: b5389086ad7b ("hugetlbfs: extend the definition of hugepages parameter to support node allocation")
> Fixes: e79ce9832316 ("hugetlbfs: fix a truncation issue in hugepages parameter")
> Fixes: f9317f77a6e0 ("hugetlb: clean up potential spectre issue warnings")
> Signed-off-by: Peng Liu <liupeng256@...wei.com>
> ---
> mm/hugetlb.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Thank you!
I am guessing that at one time nodes were contiguous at least at boot time.
When that changed, hugetlb was not updated. :(
Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
--
Mike Kravetz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists