From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.lists-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland-/Z5OmTQCD9xF6kxbq+BtvQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
libc-alpha
<libc-alpha-9JcytcrH/bA+uJoB2kUjGw@public.gmane.org>mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: What *is* the API for sched_getaffinity? Should sched_getaffinity always succeed when using cpu_set_t?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:28:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558D6171.1060901@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51EDB378.8070301-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Carlos,
On 07/23/2013 12:34 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 07/22/2013 05:43 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
>>> I can fix the glibc manual. A 'configured' CPU is one that the OS
>>> can bring online.
>>
>> Where do you get this definition, in the absence of a standard that
>> specifies _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF? The only definition I've ever known for
>> _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF is a value that's constant for at least the life of
>> the process (and probably until reboot) that is the upper bound for what
>> _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN might ever report. If the implementation for Linux is
>> inconsistent with that definition, then it's just a bug in the implementation.
>
> Let me reiterate my understanding such that you can help me clarify
> exactly my interpretation of the glibc manual wording regarding the
> two existing constants.
>
> The reality of the situation is that the linux kernel as an abstraction
> presents the following:
>
> (a) The number of online cpus.
> - Changes dynamically.
> - Not constant for the life of the process, but pretty constant.
>
> (b) The number of configured cpus.
> - The number of detected cpus that the OS could access.
> - Some of them may be offline for various reasons.
> - Changes dynamically with hotplug.
>
> (c) The number of possible CPUs the OS or hardware can support.
> - The internal software infrastructure is designed to support at
> most this many cpus.
> - Constant for the uptime of the system.
> - May be tied in some way to the hardware.
>
> On Linux, glibc currently maps _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF to (b) via
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*, and _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN to (a) via
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/online.
>
> The problem is that sched_getaffinity and sched_setaffinity only cares
> about (c) since the size of the kernel affinity mask is of size (c).
>
> What Motohiro-san was requesting was that the manual should make it clear
> that _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF is distinct from (c) which is an OS limit that
> the user doesn't know.
>
> We need not expose (c) as a new _SC_* constant since it's not really
> required, since glibc's sched_getaffinity and sched_setaffinity could
> hide the fact that (c) exists from userspace (and that's what I suggest
> should happen).
>
> Does that clarify my statement?
It's a long time since the last activity in this discussion, and I see that
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15630
remains open, I propose to apply the patch below to the
sched_setattr/sched_getattr man page. Seem okay?
Cheers,
Michael
--- a/man2/sched_setaffinity.2
+++ b/man2/sched_setaffinity.2
@@ -333,6 +334,57 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[])
}
}
.fi
+.SH BUGS
+The glibc
+.BR sched_setaffinity ()
+and
+.BR sched_getaffinity ()
+wrapper functions do not handle systems with more than 1024 CPUs.
+.\" FIXME . See https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15630
+.\" and https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-07/msg00288.html
+The
+.I cpu_set_t
+data type used by glibc has a fixed size of 128 bytes,
+meaning that the the maximum CPU number that can be represented is 1023.
+If the system has more than 1024 CPUs, then:
+.IP * 3
+The
+.BR sched_setaffinity ()
+.I mask
+argument is not capable of representing the excess CPUs.
+.IP *
+Calls of the form:
+
+ sched_getaffinity(pid, sizeof(cpu_set_t), &mask);
+
+will fail with error
+.BR EINVAL ,
+the error produced by the underlying system call for the case where the
+.I mask
+size specified in
+.I cpusetsize
+is smaller than the size of the affinity mask used by the kernel.
+.PP
+The workaround for this problem is to fall back to the use of the
+underlying system call (via
+.BR syscall (2)),
+passing
+.I mask
+arguments of a sufficient size.
+Using a value based on the number of online CPUs:
+
+ (sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF) / (sizeof(unsigned long) * 8) + 1)
+ * sizeof(unsigned long)
+
+is probably sufficient as the size of the mask,
+although the value returned by the
+.BR sysconf ()
+call can in theory change during the lifetime of the process.
+Alternatively, one can probe for the size of the required mask using raw
+.BR sched_getaffinity ()
+system calls with increasing mask sizes
+until the call does not fail with the error
+.BR EINVAL .
.SH SEE ALSO
.ad l
.nh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-26 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <51E42BFE.7000301@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <51E4A0BB.2070802@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <51E4A123.9070001@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <51E6F3ED.8000502@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <51E6F956.5050902@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <51E714DE.6060802@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <CAHGf_=oZW3kNA3V-9u+BZNs3tL3JKCsO2a0Q6f0iJzo=N4Wb8w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <51E7B205.3060905@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20130722214335.D9AFF2C06F@topped-with-meat.com>
[not found] ` <51EDB378.8070301@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <51EDB378.8070301-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-26 14:28 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message]
[not found] ` <558D6171.1060901-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-26 20:05 ` What *is* the API for sched_getaffinity? Should sched_getaffinity always succeed when using cpu_set_t? Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
[not found] ` <558DB0A0.2040707-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-29 21:40 ` Tolga Dalman
[not found] ` <5591BB55.5080605-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-21 15:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-07-01 12:37 ` Florian Weimer
[not found] ` <5593DF14.2060804-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-21 15:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
[not found] ` <55AE5F33.3080105-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-22 16:02 ` Florian Weimer
[not found] ` <55AFBE87.1040006-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-22 16:43 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
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=558D6171.1060901@gmail.com \
--to=mtk.lists-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=carlos-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=libc-alpha-9JcytcrH/bA+uJoB2kUjGw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=roland-/Z5OmTQCD9xF6kxbq+BtvQ@public.gmane.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).