From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84157C4332B for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B34E20767 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4B34E20767 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D96296B0003; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D478B6B0006; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C350C6B0007; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0236.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.236]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85636B0003 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A362824556B for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:49 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76614958938.16.toe39_3b869a92b4611 X-HE-Tag: toe39_3b869a92b4611 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5510 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02K7ZeCb079871 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:48 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yu7ftxa7t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 03:46:48 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:46 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:43 -0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 02K7kf0g20119576 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:41 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C4011C04A; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63FB11C050; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linux.vnet.ibm.com (unknown [9.126.150.29]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:38 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 13:16:38 +0530 From: Srikar Dronamraju To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Sachin Sant , bharata@linux.ibm.com, Nathan Lynch , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Michal Hocko , Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org, Kirill Tkhai , David Rientjes , Christopher Lameter , Mel Gorman , Joonsoo Kim , Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] mm, slub: prevent kmalloc_node crashes and memory leaks Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju References: <20200318144220.18083-1-vbabka@suse.cz> <20200318160610.GD26049@in.ibm.com> <0F67B5AA-96DF-4977-BDC6-D72959B3F7EF@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <658E6AB8-581F-4722-BCBB-4BDD2245D265@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <339cf655-393e-c48e-4797-86f61df56c35@suse.cz> <20200319140549.GF4879@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <717aa572-73a9-65c0-4d6c-30f15d9d909a@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <717aa572-73a9-65c0-4d6c-30f15d9d909a@suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 20032007-0008-0000-0000-000003607A28 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 20032007-0009-0000-0000-00004A81DAA8 Message-Id: <20200320074638.GG4879@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138,18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-20_01:2020-03-19,2020-03-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=921 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003200030 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: * Vlastimil Babka [2020-03-19 15:10:19]: > On 3/19/20 3:05 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > * Vlastimil Babka [2020-03-19 14:47:58]: > > > >> ----8<---- > >> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c > >> index 17dc00e33115..7113b1f9cd77 100644 > >> --- a/mm/slub.c > >> +++ b/mm/slub.c > >> @@ -1973,8 +1973,6 @@ static void *get_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags, int node, > >> > >> if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) > >> searchnode = numa_mem_id(); > >> - else if (!node_present_pages(node)) > >> - searchnode = node_to_mem_node(node); > >> > >> object = get_partial_node(s, get_node(s, searchnode), c, flags); > > > > Are we okay with passing a node to get_partial_node with !NUMA_NO_NODE and > > !N_MEMORY including possible nodes? > > No, but AFAICS, such node values are already handled in ___slab_alloc, and > cannot reach get_partial(). If you see something I missed, please do tell. > Ah I probably got confused with your previous version where alloc_slab_page() was modified. I see no problems with this version. Sorry for the noise. A question just for my better understanding, How worse would it be to set node to numa_mem_id() instead of NUMA_NODE_ID when the current node is !N_NORMAL_MEMORY? > >> if (object || node != NUMA_NO_NODE) > > > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju