From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4CC8158D87; Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718350413; cv=none; b=hzVfUrQUaJRLN3jouQnF34T/prmbDmLdTLsnam97qD/lg1+dv2F54wv6zwQNxy/4kQsnMjXxMPg7K3n+vfjC9Jk/PWKfSY7msU7sfZync9yUPA3ckLxxqAtBylGwqH7kSFYTI9JR380cH3ay3cAdNoTNHcdC1HiU3cypsnMfVss= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718350413; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NnkmAXOOWVZBMmSqgujLFcgmwxn48aka8vwCP+88UZs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=UdNKl1T7jmLjcbRi+wNO3Bfw71GO9Yqy3eK4xOyzZl8nM34Sq8ILqEHQYlMffmxYIXVAG+mUVWgaz7c3JWPA1aJ9fbx0CwK1SY1uU96ac1TznGBUTzunGJVtrJNrdbuVrBRKI88g4HYBL0tShy8WdjvcHUUahcRJb83ft2SPzGw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DI5xFhOd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DI5xFhOd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F89CC2BD10; Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:33:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1718350412; bh=NnkmAXOOWVZBMmSqgujLFcgmwxn48aka8vwCP+88UZs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DI5xFhOdjQNg736myA0URAZZXPnU4nkPBwlDT5j11/xqDepPKNTSeUJOZL0VzP78z Gija8ZvzsBIvSQvQZgN2CKyBYONNbneV97Xw46m0pZ6iejHSj3QVukJgOHaw6n5vEJ oPmNs7XQyKSovf9ZEFJM6K15LIm3xk4zeLcrYGHwDqPjUCQ1snvszipq3ByAXJg8iQ bH22iOboDVQpyv1c0zS0BOBES5DnTQZ8taQOTO4VL6P5MvVJabccgtOreaS1mIayMf Qki3z/jPfNl6nl++W+rT3j9EzUHaYd6pMBIRMyAoApsEr1aQyraU56QXk5+aQujBGv Eojfa4GEc9Isg== Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 10:31:21 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Jan Beulich Cc: Linus Torvalds , Borislav Petkov , Narasimhan V , "Paul E. McKenney" , stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] memblock:fix validation of NUMA coverage Message-ID: References: <663e80fc-6785-4ac5-ae74-e5f26d938f49@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <663e80fc-6785-4ac5-ae74-e5f26d938f49@suse.com> On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 08:01:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 13.06.2024 19:38, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 10:09, Linus Torvalds > > wrote: > >> > >> Is there some broken scripting that people have started using (or have > >> been using for a while and was recently broken)? > > > > ... and then when I actually pull the code, I note that the problem > > where it checked _one_ bogus value has just been replaced with > > checking _another_ bogus value. > > > > Christ. > > > > What if people use a node ID that is simply outside the range > > entirely, instead of one of those special node IDs? > > > > And now for memblock_set_node() you should apparently use NUMA_NO_NODE > > to not get a warning, but for memblock_set_region_node() apparently > > the right random constant to use is MAX_NUMNODES. > > > > Does *any* of this make sense? No. > > > > How about instead of having two random constants - and not having any > > range checking that I see - just have *one* random constant for "I > > have no range", call that NUMA_NO_NODE, > > Just to mention it - my understanding is that this is an ongoing process > heading in this very direction. I'm not an mm person at all, so I can't > tell why the conversion wasn't done / can't be done all in one go. Nah, it's an historical mess and my oversight. > Jan -- Sincerely yours, Mike.