Linux-MIPS Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	bp@alien8.de, rth@twiddle.net, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru,
	mattst88@gmail.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com,
	borntraeger@de.ibm.com, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp,
	dalias@libc.org, davem@davemloft.net, ralf@linux-mips.org,
	paul.burton@mips.com, jhogan@kernel.org, jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com,
	chenhc@lemote.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rppt@linux.ibm.com,
	anshuman.khandual@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, cai@lca.pw,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org,
	dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, luto@kernel.org,
	len.brown@intel.com, axboe@kernel.dk, dledford@redhat.com,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
	nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com, naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, tbogendoerfer@suse.de,
	linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxarm@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] x86: numa: check the node id consistently for x86
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 18:12:47 +0200
Message-ID: <20190831161247.GM2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d89c688-49e4-a2aa-32ee-65e36edcd913@huawei.com>

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 06:09:39PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2019/8/31 16:55, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 01:58:16PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> >> According to Section 6.2.14 from ACPI spec 6.3 [1], the setting
> >> of proximity domain is optional, as below:
> >>
> >> This optional object is used to describe proximity domain
> >> associations within a machine. _PXM evaluates to an integer
> >> that identifies a device as belonging to a Proximity Domain
> >> defined in the System Resource Affinity Table (SRAT).
> > 
> > That's just words.. what does it actually mean?
> 
> It means the dev_to_node(dev) may return -1 if the bios does not
> implement the proximity domain feature, user may use that value
> to call cpumask_of_node and cpumask_of_node does not protect itself
> from node id being -1, which causes out of bound access.

> >> @@ -69,6 +69,12 @@ extern const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node);
> >>  /* Returns a pointer to the cpumask of CPUs on Node 'node'. */
> >>  static inline const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node)
> >>  {
> >> +	if (node >= nr_node_ids)
> >> +		return cpu_none_mask;
> >> +
> >> +	if (node < 0 || !node_to_cpumask_map[node])
> >> +		return cpu_online_mask;
> >> +
> >>  	return node_to_cpumask_map[node];
> >>  }
> >>  #endif
> > 
> > I _reallly_ hate this. Users are expected to use valid numa ids. Now
> > we're adding all this checking to all users. Why do we want to do that?
> 
> As above, the dev_to_node(dev) may return -1.
> 
> > 
> > Using '(unsigned)node >= nr_nods_ids' is an error.
> 
> 'node >= nr_node_ids' can be dropped if all user is expected to not call
> cpumask_of_node with node id greater or equal to nr_nods_ids.

you copied my typo :-)

> From what I can see, the problem can be fixed in three place:
> 1. Make user dev_to_node return a valid node id even when proximity
>    domain is not set by bios(or node id set by buggy bios is not valid),
>    which may need info from the numa system to make sure it will return
>    a valid node.
> 
> 2. User that call cpumask_of_node should ensure the node id is valid
>    before calling cpumask_of_node, and user also need some info to
>    make ensure node id is valid.
> 
> 3. Make sure cpumask_of_node deal with invalid node id as this patchset.
> 
> Which one do you prefer to make sure node id is valid, or do you
> have any better idea?
> 
> Any detail advice and suggestion will be very helpful, thanks.

1) because even it is not set, the device really does belong to a node.
It is impossible a device will have magic uniform access to memory when
CPUs cannot.

2) is already true today, cpumask_of_node() requires a valid node_id.

3) is just wrong and increases overhead for everyone.

  reply index

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-31  5:58 [PATCH v2 0/9] check the node id consistently across different arches Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] arm64: numa: check the node id consistently for arm64 Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] x86: numa: check the node id consistently for x86 Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  8:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-31 10:09     ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31 16:12       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-09-01  4:45         ` Something about loongson_llsc_mb 陈华才
     [not found]           ` <2019090410032559707512@loongson.cn>
2019-09-04  9:21             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-04 10:04               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-04 12:57               ` Huang Pei
2019-09-02  5:46         ` [PATCH v2 2/9] x86: numa: check the node id consistently for x86 Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-02  7:25           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-02 12:25             ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-02 12:56               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-02 18:22                 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-09-02 19:14                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-03  6:19                 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-03  7:11                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-03  8:31                     ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-02 18:17             ` Ingo Molnar
2019-09-03  7:53               ` [PATCH] x86/mm: Fix cpumask_of_node() error condition Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] alpha: numa: check the node id consistently for alpha Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] powerpc: numa: check the node id consistently for powerpc Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] s390: numa: check the node id consistently for s390 Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-02  4:05   ` kbuild test robot
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] sh: numa: check the node id consistently for sh Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] sparc64: numa: check the node id consistently for sparc64 Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  6:53   ` David Miller
2019-08-31  8:57     ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31 20:02       ` David Miller
2019-09-02  6:08         ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-09-02 15:17           ` David Miller
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] mips: numa: check the node id consistently for mips ip27 Yunsheng Lin
2019-08-31  5:58 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] mips: numa: check the node id consistently for mips loongson64 Yunsheng Lin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=20190831161247.GM2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=cai@lca.pw \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=chenhc@lemote.com \
    --cc=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dledford@redhat.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
    --cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
    --cc=jhogan@kernel.org \
    --cc=jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tbogendoerfer@suse.de \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
    /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

Linux-MIPS Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/0 linux-mips/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-mips linux-mips/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips \
		linux-mips@vger.kernel.org linux-mips@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-mips

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-mips


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox