[PATCH] linux: fix accuracy of get_nprocs and get_nprocs_conf [BZ #28865]

Dmitry V. Levin ldv@altlinux.org
Mon Feb 7 11:51:13 GMT 2022


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


More information about the Libc-alpha mailing list