Thread (23 messages) 23 messages, 4 authors, 2019-09-02

Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] x86: numa: check the node id consistently for x86

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2019-09-02 07:29:55
Also in: linux-alpha, linux-mips, linux-s390, linux-sh, linuxppc-dev, lkml, sparclinux
Subsystem: the rest, x86 architecture (32-bit and 64-bit), x86 mm · Maintainers: Linus Torvalds, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, Andy Lutomirski, Peter Zijlstra

On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 01:46:51PM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
On 2019/9/1 0:12, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted
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.
So it means dev_to_node() will return either NUMA_NO_NODE or a
valid node id?
NUMA_NO_NODE := -1, which is not a valid node number. It is also, like I
said, not a valid device location on a NUMA system.

Just because ACPI/BIOS is shit, doesn't mean the device doesn't have a
node association. It just means we don't know and might have to guess.
quoted
2) is already true today, cpumask_of_node() requires a valid node_id.
Ok, most of the user does check node_id before calling
cpumask_of_node(), but does a little different type of checking:

1) some does " < 0" check;
2) some does "== NUMA_NO_NODE" check;
3) some does ">= MAX_NUMNODES" check;
4) some does "< 0 || >= MAX_NUMNODES || !node_online(node)" check.
The one true way is:

	'(unsigned)node_id >= nr_node_ids'
quoted
3) is just wrong and increases overhead for everyone.
Ok, cpumask_of_node() is also used in some critical path such
as scheduling, which may not need those checking, the overhead
is unnecessary.

But for non-critical path such as setup or configuration path,
it better to have consistent checking, and also simplify the
user code that calls cpumask_of_node().

Do you think it is worth the trouble to add a new function
such as cpumask_of_node_check(maybe some other name) to do
consistent checking?

Or caller just simply check if dev_to_node()'s return value is
NUMA_NO_NODE before calling cpumask_of_node()?
It is not a matter of convenience. The function is called
cpumask_of_node(), when node < 0 || node >= nr_node_ids, it is not a
valid node, therefore the function shouldn't return anything except an
error.

Also note that the CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS version of
cpumask_of_node() already does this (although it wants the below fix).

---
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index e6dad600614c..5f49c10201c7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ void numa_remove_cpu(int cpu)
  */
 const struct cpumask *cpumask_of_node(int node)
 {
-	if (node >= nr_node_ids) {
+	if ((unsigned)node >= nr_node_ids) {
 		printk(KERN_WARNING
 			"cpumask_of_node(%d): node > nr_node_ids(%u)\n",
 			node, nr_node_ids);
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help