Re: [stable] cpumask: fix compat getaffinity

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Tue, 11 May 2010 12:43:54 pm Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:47:03AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > How's this?
> > > > 
> > > > cpumask: use nr_cpu_ids for printing and parsing cpumasks
> > > > 
> > > > Commit a45185d2d "cpumask: convert kernel/compat.c" broke
> > > > libnuma, which abuses sched_getaffinity to find out NR_CPUS
> > > > in order to parse /sys/devices/system/node/node*/cpumap.
> > > > 
> > > > However, the result now returned reflects nr_cpu_ids, and
> > > > cpumask_scnprintf et al. use nr_cpumask_bits which is NR_CPUS (for
> > > > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n) or nr_cpu_ids (for
> > > > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y).
> > > > 
> > > > We should use nr_cpu_ids consistently.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > 
> > > Well, This patch seems to have ABI change. please don't send abi-change to -stable.
> > 
> > Why?  There is no such thing as a "stable" internal abi in the kernel,
> > and that includes the -stable kernel releases.
> 
> He's referring to the change in sysfs output.  However, the ABI involved is
> already defined to be robust against change of NR_CPUS, so changing it to
> nr_cpu_ids is OK.

hmm...

ok, I'm cancel my previous claim. generically I think I'm right. but in this case
I agree the patch's risk is very low.

sorry for noise.

> Of course, if libnuma weren't abusing the ABI, this change wouldn't be
> necessary :(

yes yes...




--
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/