Fix short of nodemask array.

PATCH Superseded gmail 4 participants 6 messages Mar 4, 2013 – Apr 17, 2013 1 message not in the archive

Share & tools

gmail

author

2013-03-04 04:43 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Fix short of nodemask array.

In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid. In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.

Signed-off-by Lans Zhang <[email protected]>

---
  testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3

index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  {
  	int lc;
  	int child, i, status;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
  	read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);

@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  		tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
  	case 0:
  		for (i = 0; i < nnodes; i++)
-			nmask += 1 << nodes[i];
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1 << (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  			tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
  		exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus > 1 ? ncpus : 1));
  	}

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +3 -3

index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		Tst_count = 0;
  		check_ksm_options(&size, &num, &unit);
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
  		write_memcg();
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +3 -3

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  	int status;
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	if (mempolicy)
  		node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-	nmask += 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
  #endif
 
  	switch (pid = fork()) {

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
  		if (mempolicy)
-			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");
  #endif

Signature · 12 lines

1.7.8.110.g4cb5d

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire 
the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the 
Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Wanlong Gao

2013-04-16 02:03 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 6 lines · gmail

In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid. In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.

Hi Zhouping, Jan,

Could you review this patch? It already flies for a long time.

Thanks,
Wanlong Gao

Quoted 116 lines

Signed-off-by Lans Zhang <[email protected]>

---
  testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3

index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  {
  	int lc;
  	int child, i, status;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
  	read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);

@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  		tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
  	case 0:
  		for (i = 0; i < nnodes; i++)
-			nmask += 1 << nodes[i];
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1 << (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  			tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
  		exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus > 1 ? ncpus : 1));
  	}

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +3 -3

index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		Tst_count = 0;
  		check_ksm_options(&size, &num, &unit);
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
  		write_memcg();
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +2 -2

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  	int status;
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	if (mempolicy)
  		node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-	nmask += 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)));
  #endif
 
  	switch (pid = fork()) {

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite) · line 87

Quoted 8 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +1 -1

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
  		if (mempolicy)
-			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");
  #endif

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Zhouping Liu

2013-04-16 04:35 UTC #2 lore raw

In reply to gmail

Hi Lans,

----- Original Message -----

Quoted 9 lines

From: "gmail" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 12:49:45 PM
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.
In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid.

I think the comments here is not clear, you should explain more details about the 'one element' or the reason why the checking in kernel will be invalid.

Quoted 2 lines

In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.

yes, you are right, we don't care the system which has more than 512 numa nodes. and the current code only support 64 numa nodes, only one unsigned long node mask.

I checked kernel code in RHEL6, CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=9, so 512 is the biggest value to support in RHEL6 for x86_64, and I didn't meet any large NUMA system which have 512+ numa nodes so far.

Quoted 50 lines

Signed-off-by Lans Zhang <[email protected]>

---
  testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3

index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  {
  	int lc;
  	int child, i, status;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
  	read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);

@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  		tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
  	case 0:
  		for (i = 0; i < nnodes; i++)
-			nmask += 1 << nodes[i];
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1 << (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  			tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
  		exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus > 1 ? ncpus : 1));

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 99

Quoted 6 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));

I found '1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))' is used frequently, I suggest we can create a macro, such as:

# define GET_NODE_MASK(nid) 1 << (nid % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))

also please update the patch, as there's some updates before your patch in lib/mem.c, which makes some conflict with the latest tree.

Thanks,
Zhouping

Quoted 88 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

  	setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		Tst_count = 0;
  		check_ksm_options(&size, &num, &unit);
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
  		write_memcg();
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +2 -2

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  	int status;
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	if (mempolicy)
  		node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-	nmask += 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
  #endif

  	switch (pid = fork()) {

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +1 -2

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
  		if (mempolicy)
-			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");
  #endif
--

1.7.8.110.g4cb5d

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness. Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Signature · 13 lines

Thanks,
Zhouping

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced
analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building
apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use
our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Jan Stancek

2013-04-16 06:58 UTC #3 lore raw

----- Original Message -----

Quoted 14 lines

From: "Zhouping Liu" <[email protected]>
To: "gmail" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], "Wanlong Gao" <[email protected]>, "Jan Stancek" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, 16 April, 2013 6:34:53 AM
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.
Hi Lans,
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 5 lines
From: "gmail" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 12:49:45 PM
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 4 lines
In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid.
I think the comments here is not clear, you should explain more details about the 'one element' or the reason why the checking in kernel will be invalid.

I think what it says is that we are overrunning "nmask", whose length is shorter than MAXNODES.

Quoted 73 lines

Quoted 3 lines
In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.
yes, you are right, we don't care the system which has more than 512 numa nodes.
and the current code only support 64 numa nodes, only one unsigned long node mask.
I checked kernel code in RHEL6, CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=9, so 512 is the biggest value to support in RHEL6 for x86_64, and I didn't meet any large NUMA system which have 512+ numa nodes so far.
Quoted 50 lines
Signed-off-by Lans Zhang <[email protected]>
---
  testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
  testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3
index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  {
  	int lc;
  	int child, i, status;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
  	read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
  		tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
  	case 0:
  		for (i = 0; i < nnodes; i++)
-			nmask += 1 << nodes[i];
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1 << (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  			tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
  		exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus > 1 ? ncpus : 1));
  	}
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 99
Quoted 6 lines
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
I found '1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))' is used frequently, I suggest we
can create a macro, such as:

Quoted 1 line

# define GET_NODE_MASK(nid) 1 << (nid % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))

I agree, also 'nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))]' is there often. How about something like:

#define bitsperlong (8 * sizeof(unsigned long))
void set_bit(unsigned long *b, unsigned int n, unsigned int v)

{
        if (v)
                b[n / bitsperlong] |= 1UL << (n % bitsperlong);
        else
                b[n / bitsperlong] &= ~(1UL << (n % bitsperlong));
}

set_bit(nmask, node, 1);

Regards,
Jan

Quoted 86 lines

also please update the patch, as there's some updates before your patch in lib/mem.c,
which makes some conflict with the latest tree.

Thanks,
Zhouping

Quoted 78 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

  	setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		Tst_count = 0;
  		check_ksm_options(&size, &num, &unit);
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  	int lc;
  	char *msg;
  	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
  		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
  	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
 
  	setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
  		write_memcg();
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
  			if (errno != ENOSYS)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +2 -2

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  	int status;
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
  	unsigned int node;
 
  	if (mempolicy)
  		node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-	nmask += 1 << node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1 << (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
  #endif

  	switch (pid = fork()) {

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +1 -2

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
  #if HAVE_NUMA_H && HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H && HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
  	&& HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
  		if (mempolicy)
-			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, &nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
  				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
  					 "set_mempolicy");
  #endif
--

1.7.8.110.g4cb5d

Quoted 16 lines

Quoted 11 lines
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness. Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
--
Thanks,
Zhouping

Lans Zhang

author

2013-04-17 03:09 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 24 lines · Jan Stancek

----- Original Message -----
Quoted 19 lines
From: "Zhouping Liu"<[email protected]>
To: "gmail"<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], "Wanlong Gao"<[email protected]>, "Jan Stancek"<[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, 16 April, 2013 6:34:53 AM
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.
Hi Lans,
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 9 lines
From: "gmail"<[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 12:49:45 PM
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.
In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 3 lines
I think the comments here is not clear, you should explain more details about the 'one element' or the reason why the checking in kernel will be invalid.
I think what it says is that we are overrunning "nmask", whose length is shorter than MAXNODES.

Correct.

Quoted 81 lines

Quoted 74 lines
Quoted 4 lines
In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.
yes, you are right, we don't care the system which has more than 512 numa nodes.
and the current code only support 64 numa nodes, only one unsigned long node mask.
I checked kernel code in RHEL6, CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=9, so 512 is the biggest value to support in RHEL6 for x86_64, and I didn't meet any large NUMA system which have 512+ numa nodes so far.
Quoted 50 lines
Signed-off-by Lans Zhang<[email protected]>
---
   testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
   4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3
index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
   {
   	int lc;
   	int child, i, status;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
   	char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
   	read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
   		tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
   	case 0:
   		for (i = 0; i<  nnodes; i++)
-			nmask += 1<<  nodes[i];
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1<<  (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
   			tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
   		exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus>  1 ? ncpus : 1));
   	}
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
   	int lc;
   	char *msg;
   	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
   	unsigned int node;
 
   	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 99
Quoted 6 lines
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
   		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
   	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1<<  node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
I found '1<< (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))' is used frequently, I suggest we
can create a macro, such as:
Quoted 1 line
# define GET_NODE_MASK(nid) 1<<  (nid % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))
I agree, also 'nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))]' is there often. How about something like:
#define bitsperlong (8 * sizeof(unsigned long))
void set_bit(unsigned long *b, unsigned int n, unsigned int v)

Quoted 7 lines

{
         if (v)
                 b[n / bitsperlong] |= 1UL<<  (n % bitsperlong);
         else
                 b[n / bitsperlong]&= ~(1UL<<  (n % bitsperlong));
}

set_bit(nmask, node, 1);

Looks better. I will use this style in V2.

Thanks,
lz

Quoted 107 lines

Regards,
Jan

Quoted 102 lines

also please update the patch, as there's some updates before your patch in lib/mem.c,
which makes some conflict with the latest tree.

Thanks,
Zhouping

Quoted 78 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

   	setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
   		Tst_count = 0;
   		check_ksm_options(&size,&num,&unit);
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
   			if (errno != ENOSYS)
   				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
   					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
   	int lc;
   	char *msg;
   	int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
   	unsigned int node;
 
   	msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
   		tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
   	node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-	nmask = 1<<  node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
 
   	setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
   		write_memcg();
 
-		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+		if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
   			if (errno != ENOSYS)
   				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
   					 "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +2 -2

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
   	int status;
   #if HAVE_NUMA_H&&  HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H&&  HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
   	&&  HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-	unsigned long nmask = 0;
+	unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
   	unsigned int node;
 
   	if (mempolicy)
   		node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-	nmask += 1<<  node;
+	nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
   #endif

   	switch (pid = fork()) {

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +1 -2

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
   #if HAVE_NUMA_H&&  HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H&&  HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
   	&&  HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
   		if (mempolicy)
-			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+			if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
   				tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
   					 "set_mempolicy");
   #endif
--

1.7.8.110.g4cb5d

Quoted 11 lines

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness. Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

--
Thanks,
Zhouping

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Wanlong Gao

2013-04-17 03:22 UTC #6 lore raw

In reply to a message not in the archive

On 04/17/2013 11:23 AM, Lans Zhang wrote:

Please CC the ltp-list when reply.

Thanks,
Wanlong Gao

Quoted 139 lines · Zhouping Liu

Quoted 8 lines
Hi Lans,
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 5 lines
From: "gmail"<[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 12:49:45 PM
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] Fix short of nodemask array.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
In kernel, when the user specified more nodes, e.g, 512 nodes, than supported, e.g, 4 nodes, just check if the non supported part is all zero. If user space just specified the nodemask array with only one element, which makes the check in kernel actually become invalid.
I think the comments here is not clear, you should explain more details about the 'one element' or the reason why the checking in kernel will be invalid.
kernel requires the bits in nmask being longer than MAX_NUMNODES defined in kernel must be cleared:
/* Copy a node mask from user space. */
static int get_nodes(nodemask_t *nodes, const unsigned long __user *nmask,
unsigned long maxnode)
{
        unsigned long k;
        unsigned long nlongs;
        unsigned long endmask;

        --maxnode;
        nodes_clear(*nodes);
        if (maxnode == 0 || !nmask)
                return 0;
        if (maxnode > PAGE_SIZE*BITS_PER_BYTE)
                return -EINVAL;

        nlongs = BITS_TO_LONGS(maxnode);
        if ((maxnode % BITS_PER_LONG) == 0)
                endmask = ~0UL;
        else
                endmask = (1UL << (maxnode % BITS_PER_LONG)) - 1;

        /* When the user specified more nodes than supported just check
           if the non supported part is all zero. */
        if (nlongs > BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES)) {
                if (nlongs > PAGE_SIZE/sizeof(long))
                        return -EINVAL;
                for (k = BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES); k < nlongs; k++) {
                        unsigned long t;
                        if (get_user(t, nmask + k))
                                return -EFAULT;
                        if (k == nlongs - 1) {
                                if (t & endmask)
                                        return -EINVAL;
                        } else if (t)   <--- failed here.
                                return -EINVAL;
                }
                nlongs = BITS_TO_LONGS(MAX_NUMNODES);
                endmask = ~0UL;
        }
As what you concern, the patch header should be read more clear. I would use Jan Stancek's suggestion:
I think what it says is that we are overrunning "nmask", whose length is shorter than MAXNODES.
Quoted 72 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In addition, some test cases in current implement doesn't consider if a node number is greater than sizeof(unsigned long) * 8 - 1.
yes, you are right, we don't care the system which has more than 512 numa nodes. and the current code only support 64 numa nodes, only one unsigned long node mask.
I checked kernel code in RHEL6, CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=9, so 512 is the biggest value to support in RHEL6 for x86_64, and I didn't meet any large NUMA system which have 512+ numa nodes so far.
Quoted 50 lines
Signed-off-by Lans Zhang<[email protected]>
---
   testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c       |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c       |    6 +++---
   testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c         |    6 +++---
   4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c +3 -3
index b473e45..e459306 100644
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
   {
       int lc;
       int child, i, status;
-    unsigned long nmask = 0;
+    unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
       char mems[BUFSIZ], buf[BUFSIZ];
 
       read_cpuset_files(CPATH, "cpus", buf);
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static void testcpuset(void)
           tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "fork");
       case 0:
           for (i = 0; i<  nnodes; i++)
-            nmask += 1<<  nodes[i];
-        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+            nmask[i / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] |= 1<<  (i % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
+        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
               tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup, "set_mempolicy");
           exit(mem_hog_cpuset(ncpus>  1 ? ncpus : 1));
       }
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
index be9ff96..9d2d142 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
       int lc;
       char *msg;
       int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-    unsigned long nmask = 0;
+    unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
       unsigned int node;
 
       msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 99
Quoted 6 lines
testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
           tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
       node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-    nmask = 1<<  node;
+    nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
I found '1<< (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))' is used frequently, I suggest we can create a macro, such as:
# define GET_NODE_MASK(nid) 1<<  (nid % (8*sizeof(unsigned long)))

Quoted 103 lines

Quoted 2 lines

also please update the patch, as there's some updates before your patch in lib/mem.c, which makes some conflict with the latest tree.

OK.

Thanks,
lz

Quoted 93 lines

Thanks,
Zhouping

Quoted 88 lines

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c +1 -1

       setup();

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
           Tst_count = 0;
           check_ksm_options(&size,&num,&unit);
 
-        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
               if (errno != ENOSYS)
                   tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
                        "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c +3 -3

index e4aa417..7829afd 100644
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
       int lc;
       char *msg;
       int size = 128, num = 3, unit = 1;
-    unsigned long nmask = 0;
+    unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
       unsigned int node;
 
       msg = parse_opts(argc, argv, ksm_options, ksm_usage);

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
           tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
 
       node = get_a_numa_node(tst_exit);
-    nmask = 1<<  node;
+    nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
 
       setup();

@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 
           write_memcg();
 
-        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
+        if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1) {
               if (errno != ENOSYS)
                   tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
                        "set_mempolicy");

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +2 -2

index f095fe1..abe29fd 100644
@@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
       int status;
   #if HAVE_NUMA_H&&  HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H&&  HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
       &&  HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
-    unsigned long nmask = 0;
+    unsigned long nmask[MAXNODES / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = { 0 };
       unsigned int node;
 
       if (mempolicy)
           node = get_a_numa_node(cleanup);
-    nmask += 1<<  node;
+    nmask[node / (8*sizeof(unsigned long))] = 1<<  (node % (8*sizeof(unsigned
 long)));
   #endif

       switch (pid = fork()) {

testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c +1 -1

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void oom(int testcase, int mempolicy, int lite)
   #if HAVE_NUMA_H&&  HAVE_LINUX_MEMPOLICY_H&&  HAVE_NUMAIF_H \
       &&  HAVE_MPOL_CONSTANTS
           if (mempolicy)
-            if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND,&nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
+            if (set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, nmask, MAXNODES) == -1)
                   tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, cleanup,
                        "set_mempolicy");
   #endif

Signature · 12 lines

1.7.8.110.g4cb5d

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire
the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the
Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list