build failure on RHEL5

Bug #1333194 reported by Dave Love
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
procenv
In Progress
Undecided
James Hunt

Bug Description

The current trunk (and 0.35) fails to build on RHEL5. Log attached. Sorry I don't have time to fix it at the moment.

Related branches

Revision history for this message
Dave Love (fx-gnu) wrote :
James Hunt (jamesodhunt)
Changed in procenv:
assignee: nobody → James Hunt (jamesodhunt)
Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

Thanks for reporting!

Changed in procenv:
status: New → Fix Committed
Revision history for this message
Dave Love (fx-gnu) wrote :

Afraid it still fails like this. Do you need me to try to fix it when I
have a chance?

procenv.c: In function ‘show_numa_memory’:
procenv.c:4295: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_num_possible_n’
procenv.c:4296: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_num_configured’
procenv.c:4298: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_get_mems_allow’
procenv.c:4298: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast
procenv.c:4302: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
procenv.c:4303: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_bitmask_isbits’
procenv.c:4345: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_free_nodemask’
procenv.c: In function ‘show_capabilities_linux’:
procenv.c:6738: error: ‘CAP_LAST_CAP’ undeclared (first use in this function)
procenv.c:6738: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
procenv.c:6738: error: for each function it appears in.)
procenv.c:6836: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘_show_capability’
procenv.c: In function ‘cap_get_bound’:
procenv.c:6897: error: ‘PR_CAPBSET_READ’ undeclared (first use in this function)

Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

Gah - thanks for testing. Seems my test system didn't have the numa headers installed. Let me fix this properly... :-)

Changed in procenv:
status: Fix Committed → In Progress
Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

Hi Dave - please could you try the latest lp:procenv. This WFM using Centos 5.10 but I can't test the output is as expected on a NUMA system atm so if you could let me know, that would be much appreciated ;-)

Revision history for this message
Dave Love (fx-gnu) wrote :

James Hunt <email address hidden> writes:

> Hi Dave - please could you try the latest lp:procenv. This WFM using
> Centos 5.10 but I can't test the output is as expected on a NUMA system
> atm so if you could let me know, that would be much appreciated ;-)

I'm afraid it's still barfing on undefined CAP_LAST_CAP and
PR_CAPBSET_READ (on up-to-date RHEL 5.10, which should be effectively
identical). I guess the difference is that I have libcap-devel
installed. It's not immediately clear to me how to fix it.

If I build by pretending not to have sys/capability.h, the NUMA results
when bound to one core show a couple of unknowns, but I haven't checked
whether that's expected.

cpu:
  number: unknown of 4

...

memory:
  page size: 4096 bytes
  numa:
    api version: 1
    policy: MPOL_DEFAULT
    maximum nodes: unknown

Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

Hi Dave - thanks for your patience. I believe I've now resolved the build issue if you could try lp:procenv again.

Could you provide any more details on the NUMA issue? procenv now uses the old numa 0.9.8 API for Centos 5 but I may be misusing that API. It would be great if libnuma actually had a little more documentation :-)

Revision history for this message
Dave Love (fx-gnu) wrote :

James Hunt <email address hidden> writes:

> Hi Dave - thanks for your patience. I believe I've now resolved the
> build issue if you could try lp:procenv again.

It builds OK now, thanks.

> Could you provide any more details on the NUMA issue? procenv now uses
> the old numa 0.9.8 API for Centos 5 but I may be misusing that API. It
> would be great if libnuma actually had a little more documentation :-)

It looks as if it's just a result of ! HAVE_SCHED_GETCPU and
LIBNUMA_API_VERSION. I should have looked before.

Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

Right - seems that glibc on rhel5 is too old to have sched_getcpu(). I'll put in a crutch to work around that...

Revision history for this message
James Hunt (jamesodhunt) wrote :

I've just updated lp:procenv - please could you check that it now shows the correct CPU details for you. Thanks!

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.