From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
Received: (qmail 30260 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2020 18:18:39 -0000
Received-SPF:  pass (mother.openwall.net: domain of lists.openwall.com
  designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender)
  receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=195.42.179.200
  envelope-from=<musl-return-15665-ml=inbox.vuxu.org@lists.openwall.com>
Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 9 Apr 2020 18:18:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 9312 invoked by uid 550); 9 Apr 2020 18:18:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 9290 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2020 18:18:36 -0000
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 20:18:25 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Cc: Norbert Lange <nolange79@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200409181824.GD13749@port70.net>
Mail-Followup-To: musl@lists.openwall.com,
	Norbert Lange <nolange79@gmail.com>
References: <CADYdroOZ__aFuCCBWCAOBRcH==0W-NUKH423biu217X9t6Pxeg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CADYdroOZ__aFuCCBWCAOBRcH==0W-NUKH423biu217X9t6Pxeg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Subject: Re: [musl] [BUG] sysconf implementing _SC_NPROCESSORS_(CONF|ONLN)
 incorrectly

* Norbert Lange <nolange79@gmail.com> [2020-04-09 12:29:20 +0200]:
> Hello,
> 
> I ran into a bug with trace-cmd when compiled against musl.
> Turns out musl just returns the affinity mask in both cases.
> 
> I know those functions are not standard, but the irony is that if they
> are implemented,
> then they prevent applications to use fallbacks.
> 
> See the trace-cmd bugreport:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206817

i think there are open unanswered questions about the right
semantics it's not clear what user code may expect

https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2019/03/16/1
https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2019/03/19/1