rs_numrads failed on aix 6.1

A very simple application to get the # of cores. It could work before
for many years. But recently I found it failed on some machines of AIX
6.1. On some of the full partition machines, it will work. But on some
lpars, it will fail. I suspect this is an AIX bug.

#include <sys/rset.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
        rsethandle_t rset1=NULL;
        rset1 = rs_alloc(RS_SYSTEM);
        perror("rs_alloc");
        unsigned int pcoresdl = atoi(argv[1]);
        int num_cores = rs_numrads(rset1, pcoresdl, 0); /* M312 */
        perror("rs_numrads");
        printf("num_cores:%d\n", num_cores);
}

liguangl:/u/liguangl> ./a.out 5
rs_alloc: Error 0
rs_numrads: Invalid argument
num_cores:-1

> rset1 = rs_alloc(RS_SY>TEM);
> perror("r>_alloc");
> unsigned int pcoresdl = >toi(argv[1]);
> int num_cores = rs_numrads(rset1, pcores>l, 0); /* M312 */
> gt;perror("rs_numrads");
> printf("nu>_c>res:>d\>", num_cores);
>
> >
>
> ligua>gl:/u/liguangl> ./a.>ut 5
> rs_alloc: Error 0
> rs>numrads: Invalid argument
> num_cores:-1

I found on the full partition machine, the valid sdl level is 0-6, and
5 corresponds to the physical cores.
But on the lpar, I found the sdl level is 0-2.
The question is, how could I know the sdl level of num_cores for a
machine?

> > rsethandle_t rset1=NUL>;>
> > rset1 = rs_alloc(RS_SY>T>M);
> > perror("r>_>lloc");
> > unsigned int pcoresdl = >t>i(argv[1]);
> > int num_cores = rs_numrads(rset1, pcores>l> 0); /* M312 */
> > gt;p>rror("rs_numrads");
> > printf("nu>_c>r>s:%d>n"> >um_cores);
>
> > }
>>
> > ligua>g>:/u/liguangl> ./a.ou> >
> > rs_alloc: Error 0
> > rs>n>mrads: Invalid >rg>ment
> > num_cores:-1
>
> I found on the full partition machine, the v>lid sdl level is 0-6, and
> 5 correspo>ds to the physical cores.
> But on the lpar, I f>und the sdl level is 0-2.
> The question is, how could I know the sd> level of num_cores for a
> machine?

Looking in the documentation for these routines online at suggests
that you query the maximum system detail level in some manner, for
example:

printf("rs_getinfo(0, R_MAXSDL, 0)=%d\n",rs_getinfo(0, R_MAXSDL, 0));

The doco is here:

 http://www.**--****.com/ 

> > > rsethandle_t rset1=NUL>;>
> > > rset1 = rs_alloc(RS_SY>T>M>;
> > > perror("r>_>l>oc");
> > > unsigned int pcoresdl = >t>i>argv[1]);
> > > int num_cores = rs_numrads(rset1, pcores>l> >); /* M312 */
> > > gt;p>r>or("rs_numrads");
> > > printf("nu>_c>r>s>%d\n>, >u>_>ores);
>
> > > }
>>
> > > ligua>g>:>u/liguangl> ./a.out >
>>>> > rs_alloc: Error 0
> > > rs>n>m>ads: Invalid ar>um>n>
> > > num_cores:-1
>
> > I found on the full partition machine, the v>l>d sdl level is 0-6, and
> > 5 correspo>d> to the physical cores.
> > But on the lpar, I f>u>d the sdl level is 0-2.
> > The question is, how could I know the sd> >evel of num>co>es for a
> > machine?
>
> Looking in the documentation for these r>utines online at suggests
> that you query the maximum system detail>level in so>e >anner, for
> example:
>
> printf("rs_getinfo(0, R_MAXSDL, 0)=%d\n",rs>ge>info(0, R_MAXSDL, 0)>;
>>
> The doco is here:
>
>  http://www.**--****.com/ 

R_MAXSDL is 2 on my machine.
My machine is a lpar, with 4 virtial CPUs.  The following calls:
rs_numrads(rset1, 0, 0);
rs_numrads(rset1, 1, 0);
rs_numrads(rset1, 2, 0);
will return 1, 1, 9 respectively.  But it's obvious that none of them
corresponds to number of cpu cores.

Is it possible a rs_numrads bug?

> > > > rsethandle_t rset1=NUL>;>
> > > > rset1 = rs_alloc(RS_SY>T>M>;>
> > > > perror("r>_>l>o>");
> > > > unsigned int pcoresdl = >t>i>a>gv[1]);
> > > > int num_cores = rs_numrads(rset1, pcores>l> >)> /* M312 */
> > > > gt;p>r>o>("rs_numrads");
> > > > printf("nu>_c>r>s>%>\n",>nu>_>o>e>);
>
> > > > }
>
> > > > rs>n>m>a>s: Invalid argu>en>
>>>> > > num_cores:-1
>
> > > I found on the full partition machine, the v>l>d>sdl level is 0-6, and
> > > 5 correspo>d> >o the physical cores.
> > > But on the lpar, I f>u>d>the sdl level is 0-2.
> > > The question is, how could I know the sd> >e>el of num_c>re> >or a
> > > machine?
>
> > Looking in the documentation for these r>u>ines online at suggests
> > that you query the maximum system detail>l>vel in some>ma>n>r, for
> > example:
>
> > printf("rs_getinfo(0, R_MAXSDL, 0)=%d\n",rs>ge>i>fo(0, R_MAXSDL, 0));>
>>
> > The doco is here:
>
> > http://www.**--****.com/ ;r1>topic/com.ibm.aix.b...
>
> R_>AXSDL is 2 on my machine.
> My machine is a lpar, with 4 virtial C>Us. he following calls:
> will return 1, 1, 9 respectively. ut it's>obvious that none of them
> correspon>s >o number of cpu cores.
>
> Is it possible a rs_numrads bug?

The documentation is not clear on what would be expected on your
machine. But in any case, the resource scheduling routines may not be
what you're after. The supported way to get information like the
number of CPUs is via perfstat_cpu_total(). Take a look here:

 http://www.**--****.com/