linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: numa_memblks: Identify the accurate NUMA ID of CFMW

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: <20260106031042.1606729-2-cuichao1753@phytium.com.cn>
Date: Tue,  6 Jan 2026 11:10:42 +0800
From: Cui Chao <cuichao1753@...tium.com.cn>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: Wang Yinfeng <wangyinfeng@...tium.com.cn>,
	linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: numa_memblks: Identify the accurate NUMA ID of CFMW

In some physical memory layout designs, the address space of CFMW
resides between multiple segments of system memory belonging to
the same NUMA node. In numa_cleanup_meminfo, these multiple segments
of system memory are merged into a larger numa_memblk. When
identifying which NUMA node the CFMW belongs to, it may be incorrectly
assigned to the NUMA node of the merged system memory.

Example memory layout:

Physical address space:
    0x00000000 - 0x1FFFFFFF  System RAM (node0)
    0x20000000 - 0x2FFFFFFF  CXL CFMW (node2)
    0x40000000 - 0x5FFFFFFF  System RAM (node0)
    0x60000000 - 0x7FFFFFFF  System RAM (node1)

After numa_cleanup_meminfo, the two node0 segments are merged into one:
    0x00000000 - 0x5FFFFFFF  System RAM (node0) // CFMW is inside the range
    0x60000000 - 0x7FFFFFFF  System RAM (node1)

So the CFMW (0x20000000-0x2FFFFFFF) will be incorrectly assigned to node0.

To address this scenario, accurately identifying the correct NUMA node
can be achieved by checking whether the region belongs to both
numa_meminfo and numa_reserved_meminfo.

Signed-off-by: Cui Chao <cuichao1753@...tium.com.cn>
---
 mm/numa_memblks.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/numa_memblks.c b/mm/numa_memblks.c
index 5b009a9cd8b4..e91908ed8661 100644
--- a/mm/numa_memblks.c
+++ b/mm/numa_memblks.c
@@ -568,15 +568,16 @@ static int meminfo_to_nid(struct numa_meminfo *mi, u64 start)
 int phys_to_target_node(u64 start)
 {
 	int nid = meminfo_to_nid(&numa_meminfo, start);
+	int reserved_nid = meminfo_to_nid(&numa_reserved_meminfo, start);
 
 	/*
 	 * Prefer online nodes, but if reserved memory might be
 	 * hot-added continue the search with reserved ranges.
 	 */
-	if (nid != NUMA_NO_NODE)
+	if (nid != NUMA_NO_NODE && reserved_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
 		return nid;
 
-	return meminfo_to_nid(&numa_reserved_meminfo, start);
+	return reserved_nid;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phys_to_target_node);
 
-- 
2.33.0