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>