On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:36:52 -0700 "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:So Ingo has now merged some x86 patches which apparently had a dependency upon this patch: "otherwise free_bootmem_node in dma32_free could do sth bad.". I had this patch on hold awaiting conclusive feedback from Andi. It looks like it needs to be merged asap and any remaining problems should be addressed separately. Here's what I have: From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> With numa enabled, some callers could have a range o fmemory on one node but try to free that on other node. This can cause some pages to be freed wrongly. For example: when we try to allocate 128g boot ram early for gart/swiotlb, and free that range later so gart/swiotlb can get some range afterwards. With this patch, we don't need to care which node holds the range, just loop to call free_bootmem_node for all online nodes. This patch makes free_bootmem_core() more robust by trimming the sidx and eidx according the ram range that the node has. And make the free_bootmem_core handle this out of range case. We could use bdata_list to make sure the range can be freed for sure. So next time, we don't need to loop online nodes and could use free_bootmem directly. Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> --- mm/bootmem.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff -puN mm/bootmem.c~mm-fix-boundary-checking-in-free_bootmem_core mm/bootmem.c --- a/mm/bootmem.c~mm-fix-boundary-checking-in-free_bootmem_core +++ a/mm/bootmem.c @@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ static int __init reserve_bootmem_core(b BUG_ON(!size); BUG_ON(PFN_DOWN(addr) >= bdata->node_low_pfn); BUG_ON(PFN_UP(addr + size) > bdata->node_low_pfn); + BUG_ON(addr < bdata->node_boot_start); sidx = PFN_DOWN(addr - bdata->node_boot_start); eidx = PFN_UP(addr + size - bdata->node_boot_start); @@ -156,21 +157,31 @@ static void __init free_bootmem_core(boo unsigned long sidx, eidx; unsigned long i; + BUG_ON(!size); + + /* out range */ + if (addr + size < bdata->node_boot_start || + PFN_DOWN(addr) > bdata->node_low_pfn) + return; /* * round down end of usable mem, partially free pages are * considered reserved. */ - BUG_ON(!size); - BUG_ON(PFN_DOWN(addr + size) > bdata->node_low_pfn); - if (addr < bdata->last_success) + if (addr >= bdata->node_boot_start && addr < bdata->last_success) bdata->last_success = addr; /* - * Round up the beginning of the address. + * Round up to index to the range. */ - sidx = PFN_UP(addr) - PFN_DOWN(bdata->node_boot_start); + if (PFN_UP(addr) > PFN_DOWN(bdata->node_boot_start)) + sidx = PFN_UP(addr) - PFN_DOWN(bdata->node_boot_start); + else + sidx = 0; + eidx = PFN_DOWN(addr + size - bdata->node_boot_start); + if (eidx > bdata->node_low_pfn - PFN_DOWN(bdata->node_boot_start)) + eidx = bdata->node_low_pfn - PFN_DOWN(bdata->node_boot_start); for (i = sidx; i < eidx; i++) { if (unlikely(!test_and_clear_bit(i, bdata->node_bootmem_map))) @@ -421,7 +432,9 @@ int __init reserve_bootmem(unsigned long void __init free_bootmem(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size) { - free_bootmem_core(NODE_DATA(0)->bdata, addr, size); + bootmem_data_t *bdata; + list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list) + free_bootmem_core(bdata, addr, size); } unsigned long __init free_all_bootmem(void) _ --
| Jeremy Fitzhardinge | Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Mike Galbraith | Re: regression: CD burning (k3b) went broke |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Michael Grollman | Re: 8169 Intermittent ifup Failure Issue With RTL8102E Chipset in Intel's New D945... |
