Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT and SLIT | From | Hanjun Guo <> | Date | Wed, 27 Jan 2016 15:12:15 +0800 |
| |
On 2016/1/25 18:21, Robert Richter wrote: > On 23.01.16 17:39:20, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..f7f7533 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_numa.c >> +/* Callback for parsing of the Proximity Domain <-> Memory Area mappings */ >> +int __init acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma) >> +{ >> + u64 start, end; >> + int node, pxm; >> + >> + if (srat_disabled()) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + >> + if (ma->header.length != sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity)) { > Must be: > > ma->header.length < sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity)) { > > Allow extensions to struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity in newer versions.
Hmm, I think we need to remove the check here now.
There are three cases:
- firmware ACPI version is consistent with the ACPICA one, then ma->header.length == sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity )
- firmware ACPI version is not consistent with the ACPICA one, for example, struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity is extended in new ACI version, but the formware is using the older one, then it's ok to use ma->header.length < sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity )
- but if we use the older kernel + updated new firmware, then ma->header.length > sizeof(struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity ) will be the case, right?
> >> + bad_srat(); >> + return -EINVAL; > We need a pr_err() here to avoid that numa setup fails silently due to > bad fw. This applies to all error paths. > > See my delta patch below. You can merge it with your patch.
Thanks! I wil merge it into next version.
Hanjun
| |