Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:55:22 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, Norbert Lange <nolange79@...il.com> Subject: Re: [BUG] sysconf implementing _SC_NPROCESSORS_(CONF|ONLN) incorrectly On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:08:52PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > >> For glibc, we had to change our logic to artificially inflate the CPU > >> to 2 if we cannot determine it, as the more conservative choice. > > > > Wait, you mean some software is abusing these interfaces to omit > > memory barriers or something? *facepalm* *sigh* > > Yes, indeed. glibc itself parses uname -v output for this purpose > (something we should probably remove, too). I don't understand. Certainly it's not executing a child process at runtime. Do you mean SYS_uname or are you talking about guessing number of cpus for parallel build at make time or something? Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.