Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, anshuman.khandual@arm.com,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rppt@linux.ibm.com, cai@lca.pw,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, will@kernel.org, adobriyan@gmail.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: numa: check the node id before accessing node_to_cpumask_map
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 08:44:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190830064421.GS28313@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49b86da7-f114-27c2-463a-9bf5082ac197@huawei.com>

On Fri 30-08-19 14:35:26, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> On 2019/8/30 13:55, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 30-08-19 10:26:31, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> >> Some buggy bios may not set the device' numa id, and dev_to_node
> >> will return -1, which may cause global-out-of-bounds error
> >> detected by KASAN.
> > 
> > Why should we workaround a buggy bios like that? Is it so widespread and
> > no BIOS update available? Also, why is this arm64 specific?
> 
> For our case, there is BIOS update available. I just thought it might
> be better to protect from this case when BIOS has not implemented the
> device' numa id setting feature or the feature from BIOS has some bug.
> 
> It is not arm64 specific, right now I only have arm64 board. If it is
> ok to protect this from the buggy BIOS, maybe all other arch can be
> changed too.

If we are to really care then this should be consistent among
architectures IMHO. But I am not really sure this is really worth it.
The code is quite old and I do not really remember any reports. 

> >> This patch changes cpumask_of_node to return cpu_none_mask if the
> >> node is not valid, and sync the cpumask_of_node between the
> >> cpumask_of_node function in numa.h and numa.c.
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> When CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is defined, the cpumask_of_node() in
> numa.c is used, if not, the cpumask_of_node() in numa.h is used.
> 
> I am not sure why there is difference between them, and it is there
> when since the below commit:
> 1a2db300348b ("arm64, numa: Add NUMA support for arm64 platforms.")
> 
> I synced them to keep them consistent whether CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS
> is defined.

Such a change should be made in a separate patch with a full
clarification/justification. From the above it is still not clear why
this is needed though.

> >> Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h | 6 ++++++
> >>  arch/arm64/mm/numa.c          | 2 +-
> >>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
> >> index 626ad01..da891ed 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/numa.h
> >> @@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node);
> >>  /* Returns a pointer to the cpumask of CPUs on Node 'node'. */
> >>  static inline const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node)
> >>  {
> >> +	if (node >= nr_node_ids || node < 0)
> >> +		return cpu_none_mask;
> >> +
> >> +	if (!node_to_cpumask_map[node])
> >> +		return cpu_online_mask;
> >> +
> >>  	return node_to_cpumask_map[node];
> >>  }
> >>  #endif
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> >> index 4f241cc..3846313 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> >> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_to_cpumask_map);
> >>   */
> >>  const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node)
> >>  {
> >> -	if (WARN_ON(node >= nr_node_ids))
> >> +	if (WARN_ON(node >= nr_node_ids || node < 0))
> >>  		return cpu_none_mask;
> >>  
> >>  	if (WARN_ON(node_to_cpumask_map[node] == NULL))
> >> -- 
> >> 2.8.1
> > 

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-30  6:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-30  2:26 [PATCH] arm64: numa: check the node id before accessing node_to_cpumask_map Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-30  5:55 ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-30  6:35   ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-30  6:44     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-08-30  8:08       ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-30  8:39         ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-30  9:49           ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-30 11:13             ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190830064421.GS28313@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=cai@lca.pw \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox