From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50705A04B1; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 19:20:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A49D3C8E4; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 19:20:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716D572DD; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 19:20:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3625C00AD; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 13:20:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 22 Nov 2020 13:20:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= vwJ7YF1Ng6y9YvLs7NlfOeN5jvgkLAUXlxyMIzZ28Zk=; b=Bm3qbj2zDU8vWs7k X8Gn403fbZS+8Q9Dmf5E4VpFVIzTiCD/c46OrT3Q6PufwYQPgFHUcS7IDChNMkFI W06Y9bYWnRC9mngrh6qBLAd8vTAO+L/aKz5kawBjuHMxsxtXzTAbCk+UgJ6ylweq daYsxjkWqFVZQ03o+qnpX4S6HTmGRerFl7X12whXoSEsaud4vsmwj1iC7za5R/gu kq5BauEpzMaRb2d6UQJ5RXGU1oE875xlSiE/9vkUSfxRf3q0NvyoxWevIOAaGBZk 3M+1ncZm4kfAj1uHP7Gyk/Rce2chSTnorXAUYhH31b++PJHbWfoGrp30KylDQANq bZVKFg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=vwJ7YF1Ng6y9YvLs7NlfOeN5jvgkLAUXlxyMIzZ28 Zk=; b=ca4+vggb3v7/OV8af1XLfXtc/7AL5mXOybJew6Lz+M0qziv6vQiicfveO /eMHvNxWmtI+6gDxIWeK1qALFkzSp3IzQfsDim11LG9a0ohlpS47I4z3f/wU2wNn zk+G3ZB5Z6Ca2PlF9HI2d45Jjrz0lfC6g7IXFpEYBOS2vD6H5v6l96Vk0zur9Jn3 65tb2oiqMGvbXeElqVrxdyGwp8uTHyQ9WZfwl7hSvI4yL8vp2R6ptr54xWnAV2rm SKAk0FR3X9Hmj12r2XxrmJudFt0CXBjpH6ZEibkUZjVJJDY5Yr3/Qks+IH5s4UK2 79UUCCqc5+pqdEfNJCXeJ4EYHQYoQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudeggedguddugecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh fuihiivgepudenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr lhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 38AA5328005A; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 13:20:08 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: anatoly.burakov@intel.com, Yunjian Wang Cc: stable@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com, jerry.lilijun@huawei.com, xudingke@huawei.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, john.mcnamara@intel.com, asafp@nvidia.com Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 19:20:07 +0100 Message-ID: <11688709.CXgpgmMZx0@thomas> In-Reply-To: <6957254.HVmevjuWZl@thomas> References: <1595515713-24640-1-git-send-email-wangyunjian@huawei.com> <1768774.JEQ3pMzOXi@thomas> <6957254.HVmevjuWZl@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3] eal: fix create user mem map repeatedly when it exists X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 15/11/2020 15:23, Thomas Monjalon: > 20/10/2020 16:09, Thomas Monjalon: > > 16/10/2020 11:28, wangyunjian: > > > From: Yunjian Wang > > > > > > Currently, a issue that a container has many devices and the > > > application will map the same memory many times. The kernel > > > driver returns EEXIST as long as there are overlapping memory > > > areas. As a result, we repeatedly create new user mem map entry > > > for the same memory segment and this will lead to no more space > > > for other user mem maps. > > > > > > To resolve the issue, add support to remove the same entry in > > > the function compact_user_maps(). > > > > Sorry I don't understand the explanations above. > > Anatoly, please could you help in rewording? > > Ping for rewording please. What is the conclusion? This fix is not worth the effort?