Comment 11 for bug 1251209

You wrote:

> I'm rather confused by the null affinity list you're seeing in #6 as I
> explictly handle that scenario. Did you definitely take the latest
> lp:procenv?

Yes, at the time. Anyhow I've now updated and debugged it.

> I'm also confused by why libnuma is giving you different
> results to hwloc since they both use the same system call fwics. TBH,
> I'd rather not use either library but libnuma is atleast simple - I have
> no idea at this point how to use hwloc to query numa details at this
> stage.

I'm not sure what you mean by numa details. I can't remember the API,
but it's straightforward to get the binding of a process, should you
need it.

> I get the feeling that in theory it would be rather overkill to
> link to hwloc just to obtain numa stats?

The advantage of hwloc is portability, I guess, and treatment of the
topology logically.

Anyhow. With the current code on the 16-core system with hyperthreads
off that failed, the getaffinity call returns EINVAL and that isn't
tested correctly.

hwloc says that the initial size may not be big enough, and iterates
until the call works. This works for me. I don't know whether the
GNU_BSD/HURD case should be treated the same.