From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com (mail-wm0-f65.google.com [74.125.82.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91DA2C01 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:33:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id p11-v6so17699217wmc.4 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:33:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1995qX148wVDUVn4FAkTwVd9qHjL1UUFZSm5FPx9wmU=; b=EprxAnqAaBZLxH7lcf7p8dhTlMADqsHNnmglqaPXMYMKyjjAYxaGx3mrWpMhsW4BwC mdaupfG1b89p4Kdqx1RyleUbaU3PhTr5Gb5kSMH8vvRoqx8dIlTOhQ9zhe7Z54sdkxmy UZwKwad/2SlJzPyDs6b8wAIrlHKjGl3d4vTQL0z9jXTpHCqdu4lLnH+Pr3D62xn/PCX6 53VZg49VJYBd6vxdLyTee9GyJMxVjJ4/mwyFLHaJh7/ypUZc8t7GBYGWf4nLoQ+VjrFy ++r8BGy0YTRq8BTpm3cmKftlrrbhxnw8WGYs9Qz48Fjb9w2rqtj8wd+klNonj+J8Askq wioQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1995qX148wVDUVn4FAkTwVd9qHjL1UUFZSm5FPx9wmU=; b=tGjAgYPZYmkmIaOQ9dV2pWrfsavOnRf/+BQAFH/n4H5OTkNu0tGhI14HOW1S4FjChw jF5dQmfRsJ9YQ2vxBb3GuBQ9RkxaAxsXpzS1PN7FhPnE+3PqoMIhNb0T0smnN3KqZf44 pefYnm+UqM9gfH76UjF4k3Z8u8mD4azsH0MFM43naC+nWrK0vmq5mT+8Ea2+7yJyV2ef m/SyP6Bx7zdjJ0peRx8jUkkeU7DM/TxYTaccLS5uF8ls51+nZej1ZfbWciRmRwiAqq2w hkxq4v1SDdYILLBcYk3osnX0g2brdlsqTDkVd7xXdrbchSuJr4fzGVpGupWBiCEC9pPy 52Rg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E08lSKKT0FppX7Bd/Mu9bVbMgA15235FyJ5wFLuGZtqnK/5gQCK R8ja/ElbyEg5CINSQMiCu3sO+oYb3JeSjWF09mAEww== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKK5yBTED/hEwm7S4Nr6RO8iO94LGWsvBVXTvNLLG+nEQtCy1Jwyuit4j116QGd7N8uPMgTUWlReQtF+mLDYxHQ= X-Received: by 2002:a50:8522:: with SMTP id 31-v6mr12192817edr.299.1529350395450; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:33:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a50:b197:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:33:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1529351589-173939-1-git-send-email-dariuszx.stojaczyk@intel.com> From: Alejandro Lucero Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 20:33:14 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Stojaczyk, DariuszX" Cc: dev , "Burakov, Anatoly" , "stable@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] memory: do not use base-virtaddr in secondary processes 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: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 19:33:15 -0000 On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:03 PM, Stojaczyk, DariuszX < dariuszx.stojaczyk@intel.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alejandro Lucero [mailto:alejandro.lucero@netronome.com] > > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 7:22 PM > > > > Should not be better to handle these allocations being aware about the > > problem for secondary processes? > > > > I do not know exactly what are the (other) reasons behind base-virtaddr, > > but it turns out NFP requires this to be used when DPDK apps executed > > by non-root users. > > > > I'm working on a RFC for handling our specific case, that could also be > > required for other devices, and this change would make the NFP unusable > > for the secondary processes. > > > > The only place base-virtaddr is used in secondary processes in DPDK 18.05 > is this shadow memseg mapping, which shouldn't really need to be accessed > by anyone else than DPDK EAL. Yes, I'm aware this is EAL code. Can you point me out to an NFP guide or some code that describes this in > more detail? > As I said, I'm working on a RFC. I will send something shortly. But I could give you an advance: the hugepages needs to be mapped below certain virtual address, 1TB, and I'm afraid that includes the primary and also the secondary processes. At least if any process can send or receive packets to/from a NFP. > > If we're talking about base-virtaddr for hugepages, then that's always > inherited from the primary process, regardless of what base-virtaddr is > supplied to the secondary. > > But, is not your patch avoiding to use that base-virtaddr for secondary processes? > Regards! > D. >