Re: [PATCH] hugetlb: Fix hugepages_setup when deal with pernode

["liupeng (DM)" <liupeng256@huawei.com>]

On 2022/3/30 1:43, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 3/28/22 20:59, liupeng (DM) wrote:
>> On 2022/3/29 10:46, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>> Yes, I agree that the change is needed and the current behavior is
>>> unacceptable.
>>>
>>> One remaining question is the change from returning '0' to '1' in the case
>>> of error.  I do understand this is to prevent the invalid parameter string
>>> from being passed to init.  It may not be correct/right, but in every other
>>> case where an invalid parameter in encountered in hugetlb command line
>>> processing we return "0".  Should we perhaps change all these other places
>>> to be consistent?  I honestly do not know what is the appropriate behavior
>>> in these situations.
>> Thank you for your carefulness and question.
>>
>> I have checked default_hugepagesz_setup and hugepages_setup will both print
>> some information before return '0', so there is no need to print again in
>> "Unknown kernel command line parameters".
>>
>> Should I send another patch to repair the rest "return 0" in hugetlb?
> I would suggest two patches:
>
> 1) Fix the issue with invalid nodes specified.  However, leave the "return 0"
>     behavior in hugepages_setup to be consistent with the rest of the code.
>     This patch can be sent to stable with "Fixes: b5389086ad7b" tag as it
>     addresses an existing issue.
> 2) Clean up the places where we return 0 and it would be better to return 1.
>     No cc stable here and just let the changes target future releases.

Thanks, I will do it as your suggestions.