Generally, I think it's a bad idea to refer to function names in subjects. This, for instance would be much more informative: x86/sgx: Fix deadlock in SGX NUMA node search On 8/28/24 19:38, Aaron Lu wrote: > When current node doesn't have a EPC section configured by firmware and > all other EPC sections memory are used up, CPU can stuck inside the > while loop in __sgx_alloc_epc_page() forever and soft lockup will happen. > Note how nid_of_current will never equal to nid in that while loop because > nid_of_current is not set in sgx_numa_mask. > > Also worth mentioning is that it's perfectly fine for firmware to not > seup an EPC section on a node. Setting an EPC section on each node can > be good for performance but that's not a requirement functionality wise. The changelog is a little rough, but I think Kai gave some good suggestions. The other thing you can do is dump the text in chatgpt (or whatever) and have it fix your grammar. It actually does a pretty decent job. Also, you didn't say _how_ you fixed this. That needs to be in here. Something along the lines of: Rework the loop to start and end on *a* node that has SGX memory. This avoids the deadlock looking for the current SGX- lacking node to show up in the loop when it never will. The code looks fine, so feel free to add: Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Also, I do think we should probably add some kind of sanity warning to the SGX code in another patch. If a node on an SGX system has CPUs and memory, it's very likely it will also have some EPC. It can be something soft like a pr_info(), but I think it would be nice to have.
