From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Stancek Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 15:03:05 +0100 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] numa_helper: don't break is_numa() with TCONF Message-ID: <56CB1519.4040902@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Cyril Hrubis" > To: "Jan Stancek" > Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it > Sent: Monday, 22 February, 2016 2:25:22 PM > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] numa_helper: don't break is_numa() with TCONF > > Hi! > > > And the same for is_numa(), it calls tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, ...) in > > > case that get_allowed_nodes_arr() returned non-zero. > > > > If get_allowed_nodes_arr() returned non-zero because of get_mempolicy, > > that means get_mempolicy is implemented but failed. I think that > > justifies TBROK. > > Now I'm confused. You said that the syscall can exit -1 and ENOSYS. Correct, get_mempolicy is not implemented on aarch64. > In that case the filter_nodemask_mem() returns -2 which is propagated from > get_allowed_nodes_arr() to is_numa() where the test ends with TBROK > rather than with TCONF. It won't return -2 for ENOSYS, because of this line: + if (ret < 0 && errno != ENOSYS) return -2; > Or did I miss something? I didn't make it clear in commit message that patch now silently ignores ENOSYS from get_mempolicy. In this case get_allowed_nodes should return success, but returned node set should be empty (I'll double check that this is the case on aarch64). > > -- > Cyril Hrubis > chrubis@suse.cz >