Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpumask: reduce cpumask_size

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:42:23 pm KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > Now we're sure noone is using old cpumask operators, nor *cpumask, we can
> > > allocate less bits safely.  This reduces the memory usage of off-stack
> > > cpumasks when CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y but we don't have NR_CPUS actual
> > > cpus.
> > 
> > I have to say I'm sorry. Probably I broke your assumption.
> > If this patch applied, we reintroduce exposing nr_cpu_ids issue and
> > break libnuma again. I think following change is necessary too.
> > 
> > Or, Am I missing something?
> 
> I cc'd you because I remembered you being involved in that libnuma issue
> and couldn't remember the details.
> 
> Unfortunately, this solution doesn't work:
> 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> > index 18faf4d..c14acad 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> > @@ -4823,7 +4823,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(sched_getaffinity, pid_t, pid, unsigned int, len,
> > 
> >         ret = sched_getaffinity(pid, mask);
> >         if (ret == 0) {
> > -               size_t retlen = min_t(size_t, len, cpumask_size());
> > +               size_t retlen = min_t(size_t, len,
> > +                                     BITS_TO_LONGS(NR_CPUS) * sizeof(long));
> > 
> 
> Since mask is a cpumask_var_t, only cpumask_size() is allocated.  We can't
> copy NR_CPUS bits.

Ahh, yes. It's purely broken.


> But I think it's OK, anyway.  libnuma is broken because it gets upset if the
> number of cpus it reads from /sys/.../cpumap is more than the cpumask size
> returned from sys_sched_getaffinity.
> 
> Currently, getaffinity returns cpumask_size() (ie. based on NR_CPUS), and
> the printing routines use nr_cpumask_bits (ie. based on NR_CPUS for 
> !CPUMASK_OFFSTACK, nr_cpu_ids for CPUMASK_OFFSTACK).
> 
> (libnuma is OK on CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y because the sysfs output is
> *shorter* than expected.  I checked the code).
> 
> With this patch, cpumask_size() becomes based on nr_cpumask_bits, so both
> getaffinity and sysfs are using the same basis.
> 
> Do you agree?

Sure. I agree I missed. Thank you for very kindful explanation!



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/