[Bug 97051] get_mempolicy(2) inconsistent with numaif.h

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97051

--- Comment #1 from Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> ---

Andi, could you comment on this bug?

Thanks,

Michael

On 22 April 2015 at 00:28,  [off-list ref] wrote:

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97051

            Bug ID: 97051
           Summary: get_mempolicy(2) inconsistent with numaif.h
           Product: Documentation
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P1
         Component: man-pages
          Assignee: documentation_man-pages-ztI5WcYan/vQLgFONoPN62D2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org
          Reporter: nyh-TS7m/3hpY0sOpacJJkBjfT4kX+cae0hd@public.gmane.org
        Regression: No

get_mempolicy(2)'s synopsis is:

       #include <numaif.h>

       int get_mempolicy(int *mode, unsigned long *nodemask,
                         unsigned long maxnode, unsigned long addr,
                         unsigned long flags);

However, the actual prototype in numif.h (and implementation in numactl's
syscall.c) is subtly different:

       long get_mempolicy(int *policy, const unsigned long *nmask,
                        unsigned long maxnode, void *addr, int flags);

The funny thing is, that prototype is isn't quite right either - it pretends
nmask is a const pointer, but it most definitely isn't, and the data pointed by
it get written to. But that isn't a man-page bug.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html