From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8641B2F2; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:27:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7065220E7D; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 12:27:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 26 Jan 2018 12:27:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=/L6JeR8iNFflByxtPxorbInmfg 3gwZctMYtJDhbQiAE=; b=qN91EgvQsOiNtKLHsP5WAx4E71D5WFXrne6VSsdKwo Ff9+tAE1mW8Q3LPQqhRkEiCBKozCrpS4t0oMxKjhTXtdJ70Ves478gPFNNxsLTwB ceP8dMzC6KQSjE1r5mZtoGYSXj5DfoCfbwP9pagqvj+x6R0vG8M9EmfGVeTE1ZWl M= 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=/L6JeR 8iNFflByxtPxorbInmfg3gwZctMYtJDhbQiAE=; b=TBXZgnyPpqJTVRvlE3puHc AIbqmqRYG26WC0BSS7PeYEqRzppljSo9lMDGNGEMhc5CikfcKRL7BrNulkcH46wK 20gRvmg/zEDk/JRRJ7OcnBijXvtCetTvYAh1N7xqYuozfX41PFEZP0UXAitmjhGL nF7OZJ7mOC2eGy/MBCKriXMynarzsCpYgDNQmEpxppnk8s6DstenGOKPWaxbnZBm LDI+JbKVSPCssM0zicM5CtgkzFRltqtOXIpECmZgXKIQjq4CdiWVzc+UJkuwLzcb jDe4Z6gc6XhHZYSX7TarXD44OAcSxpBNxtO3hm0lOmrZfog6nZGVGwy5p0SCa4kw == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 164397E0FD; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 12:27:39 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Van Haaren, Harry" Cc: "Varghese, Vipin" , "stable@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" , bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:26:54 +0100 Message-ID: <27105962.SPFB230vh8@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1514735641-8738-1-git-send-email-vipin.varghese@intel.com> <1543040.UXSxQDX3pr@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] app/procinfo: Fix memory leak by rte_service_init X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 17:27:41 -0000 26/01/2018 18:15, Van Haaren, Harry: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 11/01/2018 20:47, Vipin Varghese: > > > When procinfo is run multiple times against primary application, it > > > consumes huge page memory by rte_service_init. Which is not released > > > at exit of application. > > > > > > Invoking rte_service_finalize to real memory and prevent memory leak. > > > > I don't think it is correct to call rte_service_finalize in applications, > > while rte_service_init is called in EAL. > > > > Maybe we need a new function in EAL. > > Yes correct - we need a rte_eal_deinit(), cleanup() or finalize() or something. This ties in with splitting EAL to be more modular on startup, and DPDK in general behaving more like a library and less like a single-monolith. > > For the 18.02 timeframe, the simplest solution to solve the secondary process mem-leak issue than to merge into these applications, unfortunately. > > The only other option I see is to add an rte_eal_finalize() function, and hide this call behind it, however it is quite late to add such a function, and what do we do with cases like rte_panic(), rte_exit(), or system signals like SIGINT, SIGHUP etc? It seems too complicated to add "quickly" to me. > > If there is technically a better solution viable in the given timeframe, I'm open to suggestions? I think it is better to keep the leak in 18.02, and takes time to fix it properly in 18.05. If you really think it is a major bug, we can try to expose a new EAL function now and refine it in 18.05. More opinions?