From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>,
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,
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,
rafael@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 12:33:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191030113328.GA31513@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191030102800.GX4097@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed 30-10-19 11:28:00, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:22:29AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 30-10-19 11:14:49, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:34:28PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> > > > When passing the return value of dev_to_node() to cpumask_of_node()
> > > > without checking if the device's node id is NUMA_NO_NODE, there is
> > > > global-out-of-bounds detected by KASAN.
> > > >
> > > > From the discussion [1], NUMA_NO_NODE really means no node affinity,
> > > > which also means all cpus should be usable. So the cpumask_of_node()
> > > > should always return all cpus online when user passes the node id as
> > > > NUMA_NO_NODE, just like similar semantic that page allocator handles
> > > > NUMA_NO_NODE.
> > > >
> > > > But we cannot really copy the page allocator logic. Simply because the
> > > > page allocator doesn't enforce the near node affinity. It just picks it
> > > > up as a preferred node but then it is free to fallback to any other numa
> > > > node. This is not the case here and node_to_cpumask_map will only restrict
> > > > to the particular node's cpus which would have really non deterministic
> > > > behavior depending on where the code is executed. So in fact we really
> > > > want to return cpu_online_mask for NUMA_NO_NODE.
> > > >
> > > > Also there is a debugging version of node_to_cpumask_map() for x86 and
> > > > arm64, which is only used when CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is defined, this
> > > > patch changes it to handle NUMA_NO_NODE as normal node_to_cpumask_map().
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/11/66
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
> > > > Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> > > > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com> # MIPS bits
> > >
> > > Still:
> > >
> > > Nacked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> >
> > Do you have any other proposal that doesn't make any wild guesses about
> > which node to use instead of the undefined one?
>
> It only makes 'wild' guesses when the BIOS is shit and it complains
> about that.
I really do not see how this is any better than simply using the online
cpu mask in the same "broken" situation. We are effectivelly talking
about a suboptimal path for suboptimal setups. I haven't heard any
actual technical argument why cpu_online_mask is any worse than adding
some sort of failover guessing which node to use as a replacement.
I completely do you point about complaining loud about broken BIOS/fw.
It seems we just disagree where we should workaround those issues
because as of now we simply do generate semi random behavior because of
an uninitialized memory access.
> Or do you like you BIOS broken?
I do not see anything like that in my response nor in my previous
communication. Moreover a patch to warn about this should be on the way
to get merged AFAIK.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-30 11:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-30 9:34 [PATCH v7] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-30 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-30 10:22 ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-30 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-30 11:33 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-10-30 12:28 ` Qian Cai
2019-10-31 3:26 ` Yunsheng Lin
2019-10-30 10:20 ` Michal Hocko
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=20191030113328.GA31513@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--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=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--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=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--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-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--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=paul.burton@mips.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--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
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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).