public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux: fix accuracy of get_nprocs and get_nprocs_conf [BZ #28865]
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 14:51:13 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220207115113.GA29197@altlinux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f8633c5-6335-b7aa-e735-65dc36322d7f@linaro.org>

Hi,

On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 08:25:11AM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote:
> On 05/02/2022 18:24, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > get_nprocs() and get_nprocs_conf() use various methods to obtain an
> > accurate number of processors.  Re-introduce __get_nprocs_sched() as
> > a source of information, and fix the order in which these methods are
> > used to return the most accurate information.  The primary source of
> > information used in both functions remains unchanged.
> > 
> > This also changes __get_nprocs_sched() error return value from 2 to 0,
> > but all its users are already prepared to handle that.
> > 
> > Old behavior:
> >   get_nprocs:
> >     /sys/devices/system/cpu/online -> /proc/stat -> 2
> >   get_nprocs_conf:
> >     /sys/devices/system/cpu/ -> /proc/stat -> 2
> > 
> > New behavior:
> >   get_nprocs:
> >     /sys/devices/system/cpu/online -> sched_getaffinity -> /proc/stat -> 2
> >   get_nprocs_conf:
> >     /sys/devices/system/cpu/ -> /proc/stat -> sched_getaffinity -> 2
> > 
> > Fixes: 342298278e ("linux: Revert the use of sched_getaffinity on get_nproc")
> > Closes: BZ #28865
> 
> I think we are circling back on this, on BZ#27645 [1] we changed get_nprocs
> to use sched_getaffinity and then we have to revert it with BZ#28310 [2] because
> it introduced regression on some monitoring tools [3].
> 
> In fact from BZ#27645 and BZ#28624 [4] discussion I think we can't reliable use 
> sched_getaffinity because since some container environment returns a synthetic
> mask that might break some programs.  Also, sched_getaffinity returns a 
> 'per-process' mask instead of system-wide as we discussed in previous threads.
> It should be ok to get adjusting internal tuning (as for malloc).
> 
> [1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27645
> [2] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28310
> [3] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27645#c5
> [4] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28624

Is there any realistic case when 2 is a more accurate estimation for the
number of processors than sched_getaffinity?  I suppose there are no such
cases.  Also, /sys is consulted first anyway.

I wish I saw commit 342298278e earlier to raise objections before it was
committed.

Please note that BZ #28865 is a real regression we had to patch, this
means glibc must behave properly in that environment without any
additional tuning.

I suggest to install this fix and see what could be done later
in an unlikely case anything else breaks.


-- 
ldv

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-02-07 11:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-05 21:24 Dmitry V. Levin
2022-02-07 11:25 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2022-02-07 11:44   ` Florian Weimer
2022-02-07 11:57     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2022-02-07 12:01       ` Florian Weimer
2022-02-07 12:07         ` Adhemerval Zanella
2022-02-07 11:51   ` Dmitry V. Levin [this message]
2022-02-07 12:01     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2022-02-07 13:45       ` Dmitry V. Levin
2022-02-07 13:57 ` [PATCH v2] " Dmitry V. Levin
2022-02-08 19:34   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2022-02-08 22:40     ` Dmitry V. Levin
2022-02-08 22:58       ` Adhemerval Zanella

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=20220207115113.GA29197@altlinux.org \
    --to=ldv@altlinux.org \
    --cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).