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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1701C25B74 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 07:50:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4B0626B0093; Thu, 30 May 2024 03:50:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 460916B0095; Thu, 30 May 2024 03:50:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 34EB36B0096; Thu, 30 May 2024 03:50:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187C56B0093 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 03:50:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E20E802C9 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 07:50:53 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82174290786.10.8317CB1 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [145.40.73.55]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4A28000C for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 07:50:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=XVwOHQaZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 145.40.73.55 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1717055451; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=WwWHZnR783Znmp0sUWAk7CfnRcbeENYtjo8DZiwFvak=; b=BFpvrsmwkNM8wRdAceDs+qWtUgU589NxLYiP/cyoFTmLd1JIQK5fHsOJ33t+AJPdiLaK28 ICoDg1FQdMZ7GBZh+/vKJ3CYQl2/86kuSG8QC2D5apzNI+VvZNFR8Z0QzKGQbO9GkC6Z3H JPoArflslWXR/kHGHYBjMluG0pOSRfQ= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1717055451; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Rm4kVP28h/Z0n6aKS78dKzmsZ+r+K9kyZbPy1kVc5VzpfKhTG2OHFUP3hLdbPztP70mI/9 OvsBzhqq70ZlMk+IwQWAY1fuQNXk9SEzUFUKMsEqrWI5AZDWqy3QVcl33c1u2ps3+Dk/Y9 UX+nKp9z9RnpAyfOErRLIuV7Nt4e6us= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=XVwOHQaZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 145.40.73.55 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE6FCE1979; Thu, 30 May 2024 07:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F8A6C2BBFC; Thu, 30 May 2024 07:50:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1717055444; bh=R6/EWdwMUGUziP/2USv+LZQEpwJXIK6huEqYa7H3YIA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XVwOHQaZHHulTBxGExa8GbS2aRcJpg1Vo+WHgwpgEUBKZRhXj6p7e9vYR1ombPYJ0 zy0GID2GCTl4NFWIK8WLQY3IULUC+KgwEwuwuXng3HjRH6s8IkFQeVIjgt2PZiOx2X QY1q2yQs7tad+4P5dWvJzopHzPi2Y8m3ve4vnkTH1pMQVnBpN4xfupZpjT7/vXsTNS qmIpZ8ng8nmigygkXxHjrYGuNSyzqXj3yQDcxS99/JsbbKcAHRwITktDFwPnmJhRJX dwxL+/3mpUv/CC2AZ1Yk8E8wY6bVvDnGRVJ+eJU93qQismLH1UWIgGLIszSuMZ4YQD plfng4AlSMdhA== Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 10:48:53 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Jan Beulich Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODES Message-ID: References: <1c8a058c-5365-4f27-a9f1-3aeb7fb3e7b2@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c8a058c-5365-4f27-a9f1-3aeb7fb3e7b2@suse.com> X-Stat-Signature: qbobuetu9aywhyogc4dqrrzi5u966ztm X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7A4A28000C X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-HE-Tag: 1717055450-562281 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1/fAOEDt9YP3wE0wTkwplC+o/KnioP1iJlhdyTsXkN0ELRBiwd1IPMfYmsadWfzHd35fk6eNUGFbVoZxNxC4CWDUZWkh0hJp2GwdAmst6AM73EkeAoPl67ZS+R79HnJ9hH3pgHqKY5g9Z4NX8RXzblgMe5FFi9qA66nV+wpDGlNAINH4vd0kxo9UK1T7sPETaNiNbXIA/xIdIxRxLSi+L++OgEv+HsRr12hWlnlyASY9U1r/91a4kKt/PzAAsUkb5rjjhjLGFFS4AMdpZyBgiKD06oyaa/cEX90OofC55vYeK1E+DGpz6jTc0c/yXMyNOmeP32iGIIuBDgnxevMVYpPWztPZkESouANelpEqZjWA3XJbDZUGopNn8LjptnJtO3b4MIRFVi3pua6BlYwTrmQIKzfjqzmTsQoM/3KDXOAxlWf/lX8IAqB5u2eO4ko3po+38JPjcLSPA5paOMx9TB9SbzLUP5WgjRttpmIlh/HH3frZu6M4fzFOmfhQ+TTX7Muk8/mr8PAS5mD64YZFAztBhFu5WwxeuY/O3tc3URrVsyNbIC7LgmTimkNpKygrUhNFc5xQAp3bAvXXNRJ7hkgimojijsgVpqw6+M7eS3TbgiirNmHQRy1y5iGmppOtgNEvqNCtNTg5Mdcm3H9M0TpgPdPyToGMDzMdZxj7b3Yet6NaTJtslDryFn61CYizcxNmepMziJFMWWGWCNJ2Y13v4APEh6Tq1F3pkTNXrlfardqrQzeorBlcSeGZgrjj2y84gEqrxTIOWtn+amd91ERNuv8boEPwYnEN27k/tTSn/DY8kvOfIbq8eUcejpUrH2XjBa1KmjZhWPdq91MHRjzIB5ErtY+0gDJbhVS945k5ulH0CqMkx+ZigmxgeCALWkosOvTpLsKQ5TsMZm1TATftPNuhP4EQO++vCnhD8V9SOtuzNezdcUWZTZa4yPJYjEaQtMjuuN dPXqkcuf /EbCHylO4D5h9WksYCa3lhmuHurojnL2n6CUv5pAbxg6HdzhypYc65sSlrgoBkXjvRUNY8Y9G7b9LfpcaDGyAxALj+Sr+ExZf6WBmwHGutIUA12qC0uUHsQ1lXqNT5reQyNWywlBBs+E0+QGMNItM231X6nF1FVjM/vPu1v4c/Dx6829khSHWsHG9UVr2HtRXk5g9+wjAJKKMZcvF6BAc1move8/jKftWZdZSzVmUIIJapUInu9l+ldyCFxeAFUywDnOKq16SqkOX0y1VLl/AYgW/0kspseQOYzACm5Vu6tCaUHmz/SFbBG4P29ilJQaR0zsAmuHCs4SQZyEAMGKfeOukXAHavb77sGsVltu2RPnSD+NF7FajK29Vf0TpP5FgX5/1hpuy8fie64M= 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 09:39:10AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On an (old) x86 system with SRAT just covering space above 4Gb: > > ACPI: SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x100000000-0xfffffffff] hotplug > > the commit referenced below leads to this NUMA configuration no longer > being refused by a CONFIG_NUMA=y kernel (previously > > NUMA: nodes only cover 6144MB of your 8185MB e820 RAM. Not used. > No NUMA configuration found > Faking a node at [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000027fffffff] > > was seen in the log directly after the message quoted above), because of > memblock_validate_numa_coverage() checking for NUMA_NO_NODE (only). This > in turn led to memblock_alloc_range_nid()'s warning about MAX_NUMNODES > triggering, followed by a NULL deref in memmap_init() when trying to > access node 64's (NODE_SHIFT=6) node data. > > To compensate said change, make memblock_set_node() warn on and adjust > a passed in value of MAX_NUMNODES, just like various other functions > already do. > > Fixes: ff6c3d81f2e8 ("NUMA: optimize detection of memory with no node id assigned by firmware") > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > --- > This still leaves MAX_NUMNODES uses in various other places. > Interestingly > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20170309034415.GA16588@WeideMacBook-Pro.local/T/#t > was a more complete patch which, for an unclear reason, looks to never > have made it anywhere. IOW the two memblock_set_node() invocations from x86'es > numa_init() likely also want adjusting, among others. They do. And I think that actually would be the right fix. The warning and nid adjustment in memblock can be added for robustness, but the calls to memblock_set_node() in x86 should be fixed regardless. > --- a/mm/memblock.c > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > @@ -1339,6 +1339,10 @@ int __init_memblock memblock_set_node(ph > int start_rgn, end_rgn; > int i, ret; > > + if (WARN_ONCE(nid == MAX_NUMNODES, > + "Usage of MAX_NUMNODES is deprecated. Use NUMA_NO_NODE instead\n")) > + nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; > + > ret = memblock_isolate_range(type, base, size, &start_rgn, &end_rgn); > if (ret) > return ret; -- Sincerely yours, Mike.