linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/17] x86/numa: simplify 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: <20240719172849.000019a0@Huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 17:28:49 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexander Gordeev
	<agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>, Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>, "Andrew
 Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, "Borislav
 Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Christophe
 Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, David Hildenbrand
	<david@...hat.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Greg
 Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Heiko Carstens
	<hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar
	<mingo@...hat.com>, Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>, "John Paul Adrian
 Glaubitz" <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>, Michael Ellerman
	<mpe@...erman.id.au>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, "Rafael J.
 Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, "Thomas
 Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, Thomas Gleixner
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon
	<will@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
	<sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@...ck.org>, <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/17] x86/numa: simplify numa_distance allocation

On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 14:13:35 +0300
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:

> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@...nel.org>
> 
> Allocation of numa_distance uses memblock_phys_alloc_range() to limit
> allocation to be below the last mapped page.
> 
> But NUMA initializaition runs after the direct map is populated and

initialization (one too many 'i's)

> there is also code in setup_arch() that adjusts memblock limit to
> reflect how much memory is already mapped in the direct map.
> 
> Simplify the allocation of numa_distance and use plain memblock_alloc().
> This makes the code clearer and ensures that when numa_distance is not
> allocated it is always NULL.
Doesn't this break the comment in numa_set_distance() kernel-doc?
"
 * If such table cannot be allocated, a warning is printed and further
 * calls are ignored until the distance table is reset with
 * numa_reset_distance().
"

Superficially that looks to be to avoid repeatedly hitting the
singleton bit at the top of numa_set_distance() as SRAT or similar
parsing occurs.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@...nel.org>
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 12 +++---------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> index 5e1dde26674b..ab2d4ecef786 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
> @@ -319,8 +319,7 @@ void __init numa_reset_distance(void)
>  {
>  	size_t size = numa_distance_cnt * numa_distance_cnt * sizeof(numa_distance[0]);
>  
> -	/* numa_distance could be 1LU marking allocation failure, test cnt */
> -	if (numa_distance_cnt)
> +	if (numa_distance)
>  		memblock_free(numa_distance, size);
>  	numa_distance_cnt = 0;
>  	numa_distance = NULL;	/* enable table creation */
> @@ -331,7 +330,6 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>  	nodemask_t nodes_parsed;
>  	size_t size;
>  	int i, j, cnt = 0;
> -	u64 phys;
>  
>  	/* size the new table and allocate it */
>  	nodes_parsed = numa_nodes_parsed;
> @@ -342,16 +340,12 @@ static int __init numa_alloc_distance(void)
>  	cnt++;
>  	size = cnt * cnt * sizeof(numa_distance[0]);
>  
> -	phys = memblock_phys_alloc_range(size, PAGE_SIZE, 0,
> -					 PFN_PHYS(max_pfn_mapped));
> -	if (!phys) {
> +	numa_distance = memblock_alloc(size, PAGE_SIZE);
> +	if (!numa_distance) {
>  		pr_warn("Warning: can't allocate distance table!\n");
> -		/* don't retry until explicitly reset */
> -		numa_distance = (void *)1LU;
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}
>  
> -	numa_distance = __va(phys);
>  	numa_distance_cnt = cnt;
>  
>  	/* fill with the default distances */