Re: [PATCH 2/2] numa, mem-hotplug: Fix array index overflow when synchronizing nid to memblock.reserved.

[Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 05:05:16PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
 > The following path will cause array out of bound.
 > 
 > memblock_add_region() will always set nid in memblock.reserved to MAX_NUMNODES.
 > In numa_register_memblks(), after we set all nid to correct valus in memblock.reserved,
 > we called setup_node_data(), and used memblock_alloc_nid() to allocate memory, with
 > nid set to MAX_NUMNODES.
 > 
 > The nodemask_t type can be seen as a bit array. And the index is 0 ~ MAX_NUMNODES-1.
 > 
 > After that, when we call node_set() in numa_clear_kernel_node_hotplug(), the nodemask_t
 > got an index of value MAX_NUMNODES, which is out of [0 ~ MAX_NUMNODES-1].
 > 
 > See below:
 > 
 > numa_init()
 >  |---> numa_register_memblks()
 >  |      |---> memblock_set_node(memory)		set correct nid in memblock.memory
 >  |      |---> memblock_set_node(reserved)	set correct nid in memblock.reserved
 >  |      |......
 >  |      |---> setup_node_data()
 >  |             |---> memblock_alloc_nid()	here, nid is set to MAX_NUMNODES (1024)
 >  |......
 >  |---> numa_clear_kernel_node_hotplug()
 >         |---> node_set()			here, we have an index 1024, and overflowed
 > 
 > This patch moves nid setting to numa_clear_kernel_node_hotplug() to fix this problem.
 > 
 > Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
 > Signed-off-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
 > Tested-by: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
 > ---
 >  arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
 >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

This does seem to solve the problem (In conjunction with David's variant of the other patch).

	Dave