From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB70A0547 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:54:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C1241102; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:54:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52941410FE for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:54:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1632927295; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=tmjrQ5i2XNogBQuJpV+4czwcrs/5S9pCgZ5qZ4XYuVA=; b=Ah7WAZQq3V+8E2ZuZJBs643mxqnlI2WdqQKbsGdXFlpkwPtRbuapJ2IHhNnZA+vELz3TrE eEOPDwVnPLSTEkSq+jmSFfJt+hQ2riwWby4BWRprw4tXBLvNmE2UtRziH0qr3BThV0c4RN z6TFt4fqGOMEmGbVVK+c6jx9ZTYXSKs= Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-504-ivv6PFoMMHGqXQPiTCeCCA-1; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 10:54:52 -0400 X-MC-Unique: ivv6PFoMMHGqXQPiTCeCCA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id 200-20020a1c00d1000000b0030b3dce20e1so2846102wma.0 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 07:54:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :content-language:to:cc:references:from:subject:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tmjrQ5i2XNogBQuJpV+4czwcrs/5S9pCgZ5qZ4XYuVA=; b=N/sfnlKY1DjlQ119PqqKEUbG+WkLLPUrrnCVmLCaEvbGacBib0KCdiakRne24r0b// CojAJNKPdVjlsWLAIlt3ZkxOxqTFCtt+II7iUiqFp7e9EDMwEQuucUliL6y9qQ79UJIM LBUHJIZFiL81t968EiCPDZCcbANaGcukP2eUc4FBYqEJezG1NIqwzQdXbsh4tNef0932 YlPh8hWjUu+OrS/0koitAy+Yh8iEDJoeDys2+5EXe2JIiQzijd4Ac5xsvkCHuxVxfVlg 9ahMSqCgac+TlQeGc23Y3cPmfxALoHBpglBs7loFdage0qle7z4bfEEcdsTIJIHMG89B +YaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tyQ38MK7hohLlUnXQrepIhEYXKnIr9AqtDB/PEmXv/xerJE9h wkPiJexqkV00M2yIs9SZfkfhhWPCrluKEnvXVE82B4nHUPJDfL2NAx6vy6XHX9fLKq/Fzzs1Ttx rbkdXLTY= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cc0d:: with SMTP id f13mr338754wmh.85.1632927291197; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 07:54:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzLXZlznAPZKgpRzuRE7V8gLkxoXfILP5NbOO4+kJcZ9iY5YdFcl6JrhjKBdhDUSB7Y8BHgTw== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cc0d:: with SMTP id f13mr338744wmh.85.1632927291032; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 07:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.36] ([78.19.105.235]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 1sm2158407wms.0.2021.09.29.07.54.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Sep 2021 07:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:54:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.1.0 To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ciara.power@intel.com, anatoly.burakov@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org, David Marchand References: <20210915141030.23514-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20210924161842.2879019-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <6ea20d4e-a7dd-afcb-3ca1-ffc023114d72@redhat.com> From: Kevin Traynor In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=ktraynor@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] telemetry: fix "in-memory" process socket conflicts X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" On 29/09/2021 14:32, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 01:28:53PM +0100, Kevin Traynor wrote: >> Hi Bruce, >> >> On 24/09/2021 17:18, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> When DPDK is run with --in-memory mode, multiple processes can run >>> simultaneously using the same runtime dir. This leads to each process >>> removing another process' telemetry socket as it started up, giving >>> unexpected behaviour. >>> >>> This patch changes that behaviour to first check if the existing socket >>> is active. If not, it's an old socket to be cleaned up and can be >>> removed. If it is active, telemetry initialization fails and an error >>> message is printed out giving instructions on how to remove the error; >>> either by using file-prefix to have a different runtime dir (and >>> therefore socket path) or by disabling telemetry if it not needed. >>> >> >> telemetry is enabled by default but it may not be used by the application. >> Hitting this issue will cause rte_eal_init() to fail which will probably >> stop or severely limit the application. >> >> So it could change a working application to a non-working one (albeit one >> that doesn't interfere with other process' sockets). >> >> Can it just print a warning that telemetry will not be enabled and continue >> so it's not returning an rte_eal_init failure? >> > > For a backported fix, yes, that would probably be better behaviour, but for > the latest branch, I think returning error and having the user explicitly > choose the resolution they want to occur is best. I'll see about doing a > separate backport patch for 20.11. > But this is a runtime message dependent on runtime environment. The user may not have access or know how to change eal parameters. In the case where the application doesn't care about telemetry, they have gone from not having telemetry to rte_eal_init() failing, which probably has severe consequence. I could maybe agree if telemetry was default disable and the application had set the --telemetry flag indicating that they want/need it. As it is, it feels like it's possibly a worse outcome for the user. thanks, Kevin. >> A more minor thing, I see it changes the behaviour from, last one runs with >> telemetry, to, first one runs with telemetry. Though it can be figured from >> the commit message, it might be worth calling that change out explicitly. >> > > Sure. I'll resubmit a new version of this without stable CC'ed and include > that behaviour change explicitly in the commit log. > > /Bruce >