On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:45 PM Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote: > > On 1/14/25 10:36, enh wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 3:38 PM Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote: > >> > >> Elliott, could you give this a sniff/smoke test on android? Built with > >> the NDK it's giving blank space for PCY on all the processes I've got, > >> which seems right according to the logic (before and after), but maybe > >> not intentional? > >> > >> $ cat /proc/self/cgroup > >> 0::/1 > >> > >> It's "-" if the file couldn't be opened, but " " if the file exists but > >> doesn't start with ":cpuset:/"? And then also " " for > >> "system-background"... > > > > yeah, i noticed that last time i touched this code and left it because > > i thought it was potentially non-useless given that i spend my life > > remotely debugging unreproducible things and the distinction might be > > a useful clue. but, no, i have no concrete use for this. > > I'm not trying to remove it, just want to make sure I didn't > accidentally break it in a way it wasn't previously broken. :) > > > note that the strstart() part is wrong because there's an integer > > before ":cpuset:/" which is why there was a strstr() rather than a > > strcmp() in the original. > > Case in point... > > > this modified version works correctly though: > > I'm assuming your change was just putting the strstr/strlen back?
correct. > Alas, no stpstr()... > > Hm, if there's _always_ an integer there I could do sscanf(buf, > "%*u:cpuset:/%n", &j). Except for the part it returns zero even if it > didn't match because %n doesn't increment the hit count, so I'd have to > initialize j to 0 and test j being nonzero. Sigh... (yeah, that was roughly my journey when i first wrote this :-( ) > (It's just that having the same string constant listed in the source > twice reads as a rough edge. Even if the compiler is nuts enough to > resolve the strlen() at compile time, which is not a thing a compiler > should be doing. Yeah yeah, tiny gripe...) (aye, but gcc and clang _do_ do that. even through _FORTIFY_SOURCE.) > WHY does man 3 sscanf say that %u is deprecated? Nevermind, I don't want > to know and will be ignoring it. > > Right, stop picking at it, leave the duplicate string for now, commit > 2e9d5017306c lemme know if I broke anything. yes, results from that look the same as before on my test device. thanks! > Thanks, > > Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
