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:
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000060
#PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
#PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
PGD 0 P4D 0
Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC PTI
CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.17.0-rc4-1-default+ #45
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.0.0-prebuilt.qemu-project.org 04/4
RIP: 0010:bus_add_device+0x5a/0x140
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
RSP: 0000:ffffc9000022bd10 EFLAGS: 00010246
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff888100987400 RCX: ffff8881003e4e19
RDX: ffff8881009a5e00 RSI: ffff888100987400 RDI: ffff888100987400
RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: ffff8881003e4e18 R09: ffff8881003e4c98
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffff888100402bc0 R12: ffffffff822ceba0
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff888100987400 R15: 0000000000000000
FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88853fc00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 0000000000000060 CR3: 000000000200a001 CR4: 00000000001706b0
Call Trace:
device_add+0x4c0/0x910
__register_one_node+0x97/0x2d0
__try_online_node+0x85/0xc0
try_online_node+0x25/0x40
cpu_up+0x4f/0x100
bringup_nonboot_cpus+0x4f/0x60
smp_init+0x26/0x79
kernel_init_freeable+0x130/0x2f1
kernel_init+0x17/0x150
ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
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@suse.de: add comments]
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220221142649.3457-1-osalvador@suse.de
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220218224302.5282-2-osalvador@suse.de
Fixes: da4490c958ad ("mm: handle uninitialized numa nodes gracefully")
Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Rafael Aquini <raquini@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexey Makhalov <amakhalov@vmware.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
1ca75fa7f1