Bug#981219: schroot overwrites cpuset
Package: schroot
Version: 1.6.10-11+b1
Severity: normal
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
As you can see with session below, schroot throws away the processor
affinities present in the parent process. This breaks a common
strategy (used e.g. by slurm) for sharing multi-processor machines.
╭─ simplex:~
╰─% grep Cpus_allowed_list /proc/self/status
Cpus_allowed_list: 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,40,42,44,46,48,50,52,54,56,58
╭─ simplex:~
╰─% schroot -c sid grep Cpus_allowed_list /proc/self/status
Cpus_allowed_list: 0-79
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
APT prefers unstable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_CA:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Versions of packages schroot depends on:
ii libboost-filesystem1.74.0 1.74.0-8
ii libboost-iostreams1.74.0 1.74.0-8
ii libboost-program-options1.74.0 1.74.0-8
ii libc6 2.31-9
ii libgcc-s1 10.2.1-6
ii libpam0g 1.4.0-2
ii libstdc++6 10.2.1-6
ii libuuid1 2.36.1-6
ii lsb-base 11.1.0
ii schroot-common 1.6.10-11
schroot recommends no packages.
Versions of packages schroot suggests:
pn aufs-tools | unionfs-fuse <none>
ii btrfs-progs 5.10-1
ii debootstrap 1.0.123
ii lvm2 2.03.11-2
ii qemu-user-static 1:5.2+dfsg-3
pn zfsutils-linux <none>
- -- Configuration Files:
/etc/schroot/sbuild/fstab changed [not included]
- -- no debconf information
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=E1e3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: