From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4097A0C45;
	Mon,  5 Jul 2021 18:02:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F442411C7;
	Mon,  5 Jul 2021 18:02:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-il1-f176.google.com (mail-il1-f176.google.com
 [209.85.166.176])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D454341184
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  5 Jul 2021 18:02:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-il1-f176.google.com with SMTP id i13so17755038ilu.4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 09:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=aZJ3K3JSBP5fALSupMF4nqkcD0TqgLB0/4IRUfD6Nh8=;
 b=bzxAZFoedTQ2PsL4E+fV6Hlsoz6lLTcWR91BZ3/MfIi4SZg5zxe9i7v/RfBIJ8hQ+W
 00nrSrQ4y+jllRObiVYO/1ov9EFJ05y+9ppVPk4TWHgb9VqWRYJ1uWO1DnMBjp3HQBS3
 MrxNvVZjGWl2rvbiWr4ZBSFsejw0AP/IiF+ZWLcbUggIvl3F6J7JQkxYLqUaDrIOhpyp
 Jg9XD0SDuKg2jvHeSKS1Dvwag4gbR7o7ZRbHAdc1wlVp+Gl+4rwvxvXNwbvoM8/O4kmq
 v2QXbMtm5ur/d8lxsJdWsJHmzM9diKrH4EgY3e2MfGrlNu3qXhQRLbT8fWVkLw5V38JY
 99Eg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=aZJ3K3JSBP5fALSupMF4nqkcD0TqgLB0/4IRUfD6Nh8=;
 b=XzQgpHvd5fV/SwYZlXGv+L2WDKG+W5ezcW6yPbkVWZgAWW6lZXR0NOtzK7qlIDkOeA
 an+FpqfrOtP1sN/+2FSos2/2nI+K2K3m/3uhFQTBPxmDE9ok3UvgHlQASPfLZnEvSIuA
 ftcfszc+CVKcC/krT2N81Zarc+RsUJVmUFNXrZqJIdhCFcbyrgwysfZZxXErLxN4FRD4
 7qCrJSVcTBJIvHkBoOZfq2kQ4I7fEUN5MhWQmYcaTZOG22nl+YItDLIZPhNgU3CFoboG
 fS/R0qxa/KsMwMc2CyJbeivavAr7k596mdybogYSifOkI9M3UM2v5vLkC3hz+h53RWF3
 WsIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531zRVgsXgZKFlHFCX6+BypMPJo3Cl7IzblbxWlazp++7Z624sTK
 b5Si44DHX2A857iH9608pIk45CpeLDiZfZ0ftKuzUYPevyg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyyMthllaYXsafJku0Wlb5l1xf0XVZaen5nlPAq2AXelo1VQwZwWprBQoXeNRWlGarb0MokQUZl5/ksmucdyZ0=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:ce43:: with SMTP id a3mr11133085ilr.59.1625500970743; 
 Mon, 05 Jul 2021 09:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: kumaraparameshwaran rathinavel <kumaraparamesh92@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 21:32:39 +0530
Message-ID: <CANxNyatqbufHNn9NgKq0S_1P_2wb5g1riYNkW6Li+wm0RKDC9g@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
Subject: [dpdk-dev] rte_fbarray with Legacy mem
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi All,

I am facing an issue with 20.05 when legacy mem is being used.

These are the logs added to the remap_segment function during
eal_legacy_hugepage_init and found below

EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1095
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600089000000 physaddr:216000000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1096
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600089200000 physaddr:216200000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1097
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600089400000 physaddr:216400000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1098
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600089600000 physaddr:216600000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1099
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600089800000 physaddr:216800000
*EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1155
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600090800000 physaddr:216e00000*
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1156
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600090a00000 physaddr:217000000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1158
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600090e00000 physaddr:217600000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1159
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600091000000 physaddr:217800000
*EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1154
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600090600000 physaddr:218c00000*
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1161
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600091400000 physaddr:21a000000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1162
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600091600000 physaddr:21a200000
EAL: remap_segment memseg_len:2097152 ms_idx:1164
msl->base_va:0x600000200000 post-addr:0x600091a00000 physaddr:21ac00000


   1. Can the above happen? (index returned increases and then decreases)
   2. In legacy mode if the physical address is not contiguous then the
   virtual address should not be contiguous(Please correct if I am wrong). But
   in the above we see that even though they are not physically contiguous
   because of the above, during the memory allocation it is assumed to be
   physically contiguous and facing other issues.
   3. Was there a bug in this part of the code which was fixed.

Thanks,
Param.