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 BB7DBA051A; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:07:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20121DB8; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:07:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C391B19 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:07:35 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: 28jrV132THajwqmWXYePriLrl7n1n7qVQqpO8IPHgptr3jqFdz292tMAmy+1eezRMumPMML4jF vpSW9GvJu0ew== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Jun 2020 04:07:34 -0700 IronPort-SDR: +MpQoXUQO0w4azRXxeaJcndyhDpfH4LNmARloWLI93ecpgeQrHYXGxdMaaqe+rX6Qfs7HqfpPc 9TmrJadhTYpg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,495,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="296177500" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.200.247]) ([10.213.200.247]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Jun 2020 04:07:33 -0700 To: Francesco Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <942076c2-770a-3f8c-6f40-d18b908acb7e@intel.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:07:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] very high VIRT memory usage 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" On 10-Jun-20 11:14 AM, Francesco wrote: > Hi Anatoly > > Il giorno mer 10 giu 2020 alle ore 11:24 Burakov, Anatoly > > ha scritto: > > On 09-Jun-20 8:40 PM, Francesco wrote: > > Hi Anatoly, > > > > Thanks a lot for the detailed response! > > Good to know anyway there's a "fix" already done in 20.05... also > > because I'm not interested in supporting secondary processes or > having > > shared memory... > > > > Looking forward for the backports in stable branches then! > > > > Thanks! > > Francesco > > > > Hi Francesco, > > Just to be clear - the "fix" i'm talking about is not about using less > memory - it's about not including this memory in core dumps. The memory > amounts used will stay the same (i.e. you'll still see the ~256GB used > each time you run DPDK). > > > Ouch ok I see. > My issue is that I have tools that look at the health of my server and > will report this high VIRT memory usage as anomalous - I guess I will > have to work around them some way. > > Thanks for the clarification > > Francesco > Yep. Like i said earlier, this is a design decision. I understand that not everyone wants or needs secondary process support, but we have to have defaults that cover the most amount of use cases. Plus, it make internals very complex if we had two different init (and runtime!) paths for DPDK with and without secondary process support. So, there's little that can be done about that, short of lowering that limit at compile time. You can use the CONFIG_RTE_MAX_MEM_MB and similar options in the DPDK config file, but if you got your DPDK from a distro, you're out of luck, i'm afraid. -- Thanks, Anatoly