mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"Mario Limonciello" <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@amd.com>,
	<stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 16:16:13 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <06ee9889-6b88-4016-a323-7081693ef86a@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260810144706.GC57095@yaz-khff2.amd.com>

On 2026-08-10 10:47, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 12:01:57PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
>> On a virtualized system, the number of nodes does not have a
>> relationship to the number of roots.  A Xen PVH dom0 can calculate
>> roots_per_node as 0, which crashes with a divide by zero in:
>>
>>      if (count++ % roots_per_node)
>>
>> On a virtualized system, default the value to 1.  The issue is seen with
>> Xen, but it could affect other systems.
>>
>> Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
> 
> I agree with the idea with some minor feedback below.
> 
>> ---
>> X86_FEATURE_XENPV is only for PV, but this is observed with a PVH dom0.
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 5 +++++
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> index ea553267e5fa..c5025e5291b6 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> @@ -286,6 +286,11 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
>>   		return -ENOMEM;
>>   
>>   	roots_per_node = num_roots / num_nodes;
>> +	if (roots_per_node == 0) {
> 
> Can be '!roots_per_node'.

Sure.
>> +		if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
>> +			pr_err(FW_BUG "Error detecting roots per node.\n");
>> +		roots_per_node = 1;
>> +	}
> 
> I don't think this is necessarily a Firmware bug.
> 
> Likewise, it can be a 'warning' rather than 'error'. I interpret 'error'
> as something known to be incorrect. This was my position before on this
> topic. But the various contrary reports changed my mind (even if they
> come from virtualization).
> 
> Furthermore, I think 'warning' is more appropriate. It says "We found
> something unexpected. We're letting you (the user) know about it. And
> we'll mitigate it to avoid an error."

Makes sense to me.  Boris suggested error in 
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260624192530.GGajwvKuhxbnHe0s42@fat_crate.local/

(I probably should have used Suggested-by.)

> Anyways, I just wanted to write out some thoughts since this topic has
> come up a few times.
> 
> Possible rework for the above change:
> 
> 	if (!roots_per_node && !cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)
> 		pr_warn("Expected at least 1 root per AMD node.\n");
> 
> 	roots_per_node = max(roots_per_node, 1);
> 
> In any case, we should just go with a simple fix for the virt cases.

I'm okay with this.  I'll wait to see if anyone chimes in further.  If 
not, I'll go with your approach and Suggested-by.

Thanks,
Jason

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-10 20:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-06 16:01 [PATCH 0/2] x86/amd_node: Fixes for " Jason Andryuk
2026-08-06 16:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive Jason Andryuk
2026-08-10 14:07   ` Yazen Ghannam
2026-08-11 14:19     ` Mario Limonciello
2026-08-12 19:28     ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-13 13:40       ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-13 23:58         ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-14 13:37           ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-14 18:18             ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-06 16:01 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems Jason Andryuk
2026-08-10 14:47   ` Yazen Ghannam
2026-08-10 20:16     ` Jason Andryuk [this message]
2026-08-11  8:21     ` David Laight
2026-08-11 21:23       ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-12  7:11         ` David Laight
2026-08-12 19:31     ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-13 15:56       ` Yazen Ghannam
2026-08-13 17:23         ` Borislav Petkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=06ee9889-6b88-4016-a323-7081693ef86a@amd.com \
    --to=jason.andryuk@amd.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=penny.zheng@amd.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yazen.ghannam@amd.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®