public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 07:20:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <484947A9.5050804@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19f34abd0806060707x7570c835u4b1837b54dfa36ba@mail.gmail.com>

Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
>>> Vegard Nossum wrote:
>>>> I reproced it with gc 4.1.2. I think the error is somewhere in kernel/sched.c.
>>>>
>>>> static int __build_sched_domains(const cpumask_t *cpu_map,
>>>>                                  struct sched_domain_attr *attr)
>>>> {
>>>> ...
>>>>         for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++) {
>>>> ...
>>>>                 sg = kmalloc_node(sizeof(struct sched_group), GFP_KERNEL, i);
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> This code is calling into the allocator with a spurious value of i,
>>>> which causes SLAB to use an index (of 4 in my case) that is out of
>>>> bounds for its nodelist array (at least it hasn't been initialized).
>>>>
>>>> This bit of code (a bit further down, inside the same loop) is also dubious:
>>>>
>>>>                         sg = kmalloc_node(sizeof(struct sched_group),
>>>>                                           GFP_KERNEL, i);
>>>>                         if (!sg) {
>>>>                                 printk(KERN_WARNING
>>>>                                 "Can not alloc domain group for node %d\n", j);
>>>>                                 goto error;
>>>>                         }
>>>>
>>>> Where it passes i to kmalloc_node() but reports an allocation for node
>>>> j. Which one is correct?
>>>>
>> Hm, I think I'm wrong and the code is correct. However...
>>
>>>> Hope this helps, will send an update if I find out more.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vegard
>>>>
>>> Thanks Vegard for tracking this down.  My thoughts were along the same
>>> wavelength... ;-)
> 
> ...
> 
>> This is a P4 3.0GHz with 1 physical CPU (but HT, so two logical CPUs).
>> Yet node 4 is claimed to have a cpu too. That's bogus!
>>
>> (But I don't think it's an error in sched.c any more, probably the
>> code that sets up the node maps.)
> 
> Aha.
> 
> The error is of course that the node masks for nodes > nr_node_ids are
> not valid. While this function ignores that:
> 
> cpumask_t *_node_to_cpumask_ptr(int node)
> {
>         if (node_to_cpumask_map == NULL) {
>                 printk(KERN_WARNING
>                         "_node_to_cpumask_ptr(%d): no node_to_cpumask_map!\n",
>                         node);
>                 dump_stack();
>                 return &cpu_online_map;
>         }
>         return &node_to_cpumask_map[node];
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(_node_to_cpumask_ptr);
> 
> Notice the return statement. It needs to check if node < nr_node_ids.
> 
> 
> Vegard
> 


Thanks, yes I had that some after thought.  It should check the node
index if CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is enabled.  One gotcha is that
nr_node_ids is intialized to MAX_NUMNODES until setup_node_to_cpumask_map()
sets it to the correct value.  So uses before that should be caught by
the earlier check.

Mike

  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-06 14:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-05  7:52 linux-next: Tree for June 5 Stephen Rothwell
2008-06-06  2:56 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  3:46   ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  7:17   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  7:25     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  7:33       ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  7:41         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  7:47           ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  7:53             ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-06-06  8:01               ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  8:22                 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-06-06  8:30                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  8:36                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 11:50                     ` Paul Mackerras
2008-06-06  8:27               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  8:23             ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  8:28               ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-06-06  8:33                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  8:38               ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  8:49                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  9:01                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 10:47                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 16:37                       ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  7:29     ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  9:48       ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06  9:54         ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 10:10           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 10:54         ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 11:21           ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 11:57           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 12:33             ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 13:33               ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 13:50                 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 14:07                   ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 14:20                     ` Mike Travis [this message]
2008-06-06 14:36                       ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 14:41                         ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 14:51                           ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 14:54                             ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 14:57                         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 15:01                           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 15:13                             ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-06 15:23                               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 15:52                                 ` Mike Travis
2008-06-18  8:26                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 15:04                           ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 15:20                             ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 15:33                               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 15:13                           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06 14:13                   ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 13:28           ` Mike Travis
2008-06-06 17:15           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-06  7:33     ` Stephen Rothwell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-06-05  6:41 Stephen Rothwell

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=484947A9.5050804@sgi.com \
    --to=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
    /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