From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org,
rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, mhocko@suse.com,
vbabka@suse.cz, Punit.Agrawal@arm.com, Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] harden alloc_pages against bogus nid
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 17:14:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180801171414.30e54a106733ccaaa566388d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d9f8e9d1-2fb8-6016-5081-7e3213b23ed4@arm.com>
On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 17:56:46 -0500 Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/01/2018 04:50 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:04:16 -0500 Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The thread "avoid alloc memory on offline node"
> >>
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/7/251
> >>
> >> Asked at one point why the kzalloc_node was crashing rather than
> >> returning memory from a valid node. The thread ended up fixing
> >> the immediate causes of the crash but left open the case of bad
> >> proximity values being in DSDT tables without corrisponding
> >> SRAT/SLIT entries as is happening on another machine.
> >>
> >> Its also easy to fix that, but we should also harden the allocator
> >> sufficiently that it doesn't crash when passed an invalid node id.
> >> There are a couple possible ways to do this, and i've attached two
> >> separate patches which individually fix that problem.
> >>
> >> The first detects the offline node before calling
> >> the new_slab code path when it becomes apparent that the allocation isn't
> >> going to succeed. The second actually hardens node_zonelist() and
> >> prepare_alloc_pages() in the face of NODE_DATA(nid) returning a NULL
> >> zonelist. This latter case happens if the node has never been initialized
> >> or is possibly out of range. There are other places (NODE_DATA &
> >> online_node) which should be checking if the node id's are > MAX_NUMNODES.
> >>
> >
> > What is it that leads to a caller requesting memory from an invalid
> > node? A race against offlining? If so then that's a lack of
> > appropriate locking, isn't it?
>
> There were a couple unrelated cases, both having to do with the PXN
> associated with a PCI port. The first case AFAIK, the domain wasn't
> really invalid if the entire SRAT was parsed and nodes created even when
> there weren't associated CPUs. The second case (a different machine) is
> simply a PXN value that is completely invalid (no associated
> SLIT/SRAT/etc entries) due to firmware making a mistake when a socket
> isn't populated.
>
> There have been a few other suggested or merged patches for the
> individual problems above, this set is just an attempt at avoiding a
> full crash if/when another similar problem happens.
Please add the above info to the changelog.
>
> >
> > I don't see a problem with emitting a warning and then selecting a
> > different node so we can keep running. But we do want that warning, so
> > we can understand the root cause and fix it?
>
> Yes, we do want to know when an invalid id is passed, i will add the
> VM_WARN in the first one.
>
> The second one I wasn't sure about as failing prepare_alloc_pages()
> generates a couple of error messages, but the system then continues
> operation.
>
> I guess my question though is which method (or both/something else?) is
> the preferred way to harden this up?
The first patch looked neater. Can we get a WARN_ON in there as well?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-02 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-01 20:04 [RFC 0/2] harden alloc_pages against bogus nid Jeremy Linton
2018-08-01 20:04 ` [RFC 1/2] slub: Avoid trying to allocate memory on offline nodes Jeremy Linton
2018-08-02 9:15 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-03 3:21 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-08-03 6:20 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-02 14:23 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-08-03 3:12 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-08-01 20:04 ` [RFC 2/2] mm: harden alloc_pages code paths against bogus nodes Jeremy Linton
2018-08-02 7:31 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-03 3:17 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-08-03 6:24 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-01 21:50 ` [RFC 0/2] harden alloc_pages against bogus nid Andrew Morton
2018-08-01 22:56 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-08-02 0:14 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2018-08-03 3:15 ` Jeremy Linton
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=20180801171414.30e54a106733ccaaa566388d@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=Punit.Agrawal@arm.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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).