Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1457645 > unrolled thread

[PATCH v5 03/14] arm64/numa: add nid check for memory block

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  [PATCH v5 03/14] arm64/numa: add nid check for memory block Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-08-08 11:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v5 03/14] arm64/numa: add nid check for memory block Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-08-10 04:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v5 03/14] arm64/numa: add nid check for memory block "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-08-10 05:50 +0200

#1457645 — [PATCH v5 03/14] arm64/numa: add nid check for memory block

Use the same tactic to cpu and numa-distance nodes.

Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
---
 arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
index c7fe3ec..2601660 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
@@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
 {
 	int ret;

+	if (nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
+		pr_warn("NUMA: Node id %u exceeds maximum value\n", nid);
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
 	ret = memblock_set_node(start, (end - start), &memblock.memory, nid);
 	if (ret < 0) {
 		pr_err("NUMA: memblock [0x%llx - 0x%llx] failed to add on node %d\n",
--
2.5.0

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1459244

On 2016/8/8 17:18, Zhen Lei wrote:
> Use the same tactic to cpu and numa-distance nodes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index c7fe3ec..2601660 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
>  {
>  	int ret;
>
> +	if (nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
> +		pr_warn("NUMA: Node id %u exceeds maximum value\n", nid);
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}

I think this check should be added to of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(), which before
the numa_add_memblk() called, it's the same logic in of_numa_parse_cpu_nodes() and
the node id is checked before calling numa_add_memblk() in ACPI.

Thanks
Hanjun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1459271

On 2016/8/10 10:12, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2016/8/8 17:18, Zhen Lei wrote:
>> Use the same tactic to cpu and numa-distance nodes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> index c7fe3ec..2601660 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ int __init numa_add_memblk(int nid, u64 start, u64 end)
>>  {
>>  	int ret;
>>
>> +	if (nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
>> +		pr_warn("NUMA: Node id %u exceeds maximum value\n", nid);
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
> 
> I think this check should be added to of_numa_parse_memory_nodes(), which before
> the numa_add_memblk() called, it's the same logic in of_numa_parse_cpu_nodes() and
> the node id is checked before calling numa_add_memblk() in ACPI.

Yes, you are right. This check is arch independent.

> 
> Thanks
> Hanjun
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web