The patch titled
Subject: arch/x86/mm/numa: Do not initialize nodes twice
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
arch-x86-mm-numa-do-not-initialize-nodes-twice.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
------------------------------------------------------
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>
Subject: arch/x86/mm/numa: Do not initialize nodes twice
On x86, prior to ("mm: handle uninitialized numa nodes gracecully"), NUMA
nodes could be allocated at three different places.
- numa_register_memblks
- init_cpu_to_node
- init_gi_nodes
All these calls happen at setup_arch, and have the following order:
setup_arch
...
x86_numa_init
numa_init
numa_register_memblks
...
init_cpu_to_node
init_memory_less_node
alloc_node_data
free_area_init_memoryless_node
init_gi_nodes
init_memory_less_node
alloc_node_data
free_area_init_memoryless_node
numa_register_memblks() is only interested in those nodes which have
memory, so it skips over any memoryless node it founds. Later on, when we
have read ACPI's SRAT table, we call init_cpu_to_node() and
init_gi_nodes(), which initialize any memoryless node we might have that
have either CPU or Initiator affinity, meaning we allocate pg_data_t
struct for them and we mark them as ONLINE.
So far so good, but the thing is that after ("mm: handle uninitialized
numa nodes gracefully"), we allocate all possible NUMA nodes in
free_area_init(), meaning we have a picture like the following:
setup_arch
x86_numa_init
numa_init
numa_register_memblks <-- allocate non-memoryless node
x86_init.paging.pagetable_init
...
free_area_init
free_area_init_memoryless <-- allocate memoryless node
init_cpu_to_node
alloc_node_data <-- allocate memoryless node with CPU
free_area_init_memoryless_node
init_gi_nodes
alloc_node_data <-- allocate memoryless node with Initiator
free_area_init_memoryless_node
free_area_init() already allocates all possible NUMA nodes, but
init_cpu_to_node() and init_gi_nodes() are clueless about that, so they go
ahead and allocate a new pg_data_t struct without checking anything,
meaning we end up allocating twice.
It should be mad clear that this only happens in the case where memoryless
NUMA node happens to have a CPU/Initiator affinity.
So get rid of init_memory_less_node() and just set the node online.
Note that setting the node online is needed, otherwise we choke down the
chain when bringup_nonboot_cpus() ends up calling
__try_online_node()->register_one_node()->... and we blow up in
bus_add_device(). As can be seen here:
==========
[ 0.585060] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000060
[ 0.586091] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
[ 0.586831] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
[ 0.586930] PGD 0 P4D 0
[ 0.586930] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC PTI
[ 0.586930] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.17.0-rc4-1-default+ #45
[ 0.586930] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.0.0-prebuilt.qemu-project.org 04/4
[ 0.586930] RIP: 0010:bus_add_device+0x5a/0x140
[ 0.586930] Code: 8b 74 24 20 48 89 df e8 84 96 ff ff 85 c0 89 c5 75 38 48 8b 53 50 48 85 d2 0f 84 bb 00 004
[ 0.586930] RSP: 0000:ffffc9000022bd10 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 0.586930] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff888100987400 RCX: ffff8881003e4e19
[ 0.586930] RDX: ffff8881009a5e00 RSI: ffff888100987400 RDI: ffff888100987400
[ 0.586930] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: ffff8881003e4e18 R09: ffff8881003e4c98
[ 0.586930] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffff888100402bc0 R12: ffffffff822ceba0
[ 0.586930] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff888100987400 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 0.586930] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88853fc00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 0.586930] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 0.586930] CR2: 0000000000000060 CR3: 000000000200a001 CR4: 00000000001706b0
[ 0.586930] Call Trace:
[ 0.586930] <TASK>
[ 0.586930] device_add+0x4c0/0x910
[ 0.586930] __register_one_node+0x97/0x2d0
[ 0.586930] __try_online_node+0x85/0xc0
[ 0.586930] try_online_node+0x25/0x40
[ 0.586930] cpu_up+0x4f/0x100
[ 0.586930] bringup_nonboot_cpus+0x4f/0x60
[ 0.586930] smp_init+0x26/0x79
[ 0.586930] kernel_init_freeable+0x130/0x2f1
[ 0.586930] ? rest_init+0x100/0x100
[ 0.586930] kernel_init+0x17/0x150
[ 0.586930] ? rest_init+0x100/0x100
[ 0.586930] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
[ 0.586930] </TASK>
[ 0.586930] Modules linked in:
[ 0.586930] CR2: 0000000000000060
[ 0.586930] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
==========
The reason is simple, by the time bringup_nonboot_cpus() gets called, we
did not register the node_subsys bus yet, so we crash when
bus_add_device() tries to dereference bus()->p.
The following shows the order of the calls:
kernel_init_freeable
smp_init
bringup_nonboot_cpus
...
bus_add_device() <- we did not register node_subsys yet
do_basic_setup
do_initcalls
postcore_initcall(register_node_type);
register_node_type
subsys_system_register
subsys_register
bus_register <- register node_subsys bus
Why setting the node online saves us then? Well, simply because
__try_online_node() backs off when the node is online, meaning we do not
end up calling register_one_node() in the first place.
This is subtle, broken and deserves a deep analysis and thought about how
to put this into shape, but for now let us have this easy fix for the
leaking memory issue.
[osalvador@xxxxxxx: add comments]
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220221142649.3457-1-osalvador@xxxxxxx
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220218224302.5282-2-osalvador@xxxxxxx
Fixes: da4490c958ad ("mm: handle uninitialized numa nodes gracefully")
Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rafael Aquini <raquini@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Alexey Makhalov <amakhalov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
include/linux/mm.h | 1 -
mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c~arch-x86-mm-numa-do-not-initialize-nodes-twice
+++ a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -738,17 +738,6 @@ void __init x86_numa_init(void)
numa_init(dummy_numa_init);
}
-static void __init init_memory_less_node(int nid)
-{
- /* Allocate and initialize node data. Memory-less node is now online.*/
- alloc_node_data(nid);
- free_area_init_memoryless_node(nid);
-
- /*
- * All zonelists will be built later in start_kernel() after per cpu
- * areas are initialized.
- */
-}
/*
* A node may exist which has one or more Generic Initiators but no CPUs and no
@@ -766,9 +755,18 @@ void __init init_gi_nodes(void)
{
int nid;
+ /*
+ * Exclude this node from
+ * bringup_nonboot_cpus
+ * cpu_up
+ * __try_online_node
+ * register_one_node
+ * because node_subsys is not initialized yet.
+ * TODO remove dependency on node_online
+ */
for_each_node_state(nid, N_GENERIC_INITIATOR)
if (!node_online(nid))
- init_memory_less_node(nid);
+ node_set_online(nid);
}
/*
@@ -798,8 +796,17 @@ void __init init_cpu_to_node(void)
if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
continue;
+ /*
+ * Exclude this node from
+ * bringup_nonboot_cpus
+ * cpu_up
+ * __try_online_node
+ * register_one_node
+ * because node_subsys is not initialized yet.
+ * TODO remove dependency on node_online
+ */
if (!node_online(node))
- init_memory_less_node(node);
+ node_set_online(node);
numa_set_node(cpu, node);
}
--- a/include/linux/mm.h~arch-x86-mm-numa-do-not-initialize-nodes-twice
+++ a/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -2449,7 +2449,6 @@ static inline spinlock_t *pud_lock(struc
}
extern void __init pagecache_init(void);
-extern void __init free_area_init_memoryless_node(int nid);
extern void free_initmem(void);
/*
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c~arch-x86-mm-numa-do-not-initialize-nodes-twice
+++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -7626,7 +7626,7 @@ static void __init free_area_init_node(i
free_area_init_core(pgdat);
}
-void __init free_area_init_memoryless_node(int nid)
+static void __init free_area_init_memoryless_node(int nid)
{
free_area_init_node(nid);
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from osalvador@xxxxxxx are
