linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm: Drop 4MB restriction on minimal NUMA node memory size

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

Date:   Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:59:33 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm: Drop 4MB restriction on minimal NUMA node
 memory size


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> > > Mind resubmitting that to the MM folks, with the NULL dereference 
> > > crash mentioned prominently? Feel free to Cc: me.
> > 
> > OK, I will resend it if no one else objects. :)
> 
> Thanks, much appreciated - and I see Andrew already applied your two 
> fixes to -mm.
> 
> With that background I was able to apply the x86 fix as well - which can 
> be backported without the MM changes. The current commit in tip:x86/mm 
> is:
> 
>   a1e2b8b36820 ("x86/mm: Drop the 4 MB restriction on minimal NUMA node memory size")
> 
> Which should hit v6.7 in about ~1.5 weeks, unless there's unexpected 
> problems.

Note that I haven't added a Cc: stable tag, a 17 years old bug is not 
really a regression - but I have no objections against this fix getting 
into -stable once it gains a bit more testing and hits upstream.

Thanks,

	Ingo