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 CC8E8A0548 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:19:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C338841100; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:19:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from CNSHJSMIN05.NOKIA-SBELL.COM (cnshjsmin05.nokia-sbell.com [116.246.26.45]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313A64014E for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:19:44 +0200 (CEST) X-AuditID: ac18929d-001ff7000000e323-34-611b7f2d9fe0 Received: from CNSHPPEXCH1605.nsn-intra.net (Unknown_Domain [135.251.51.105]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by CNSHJSMIN05.NOKIA-SBELL.COM (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 92.A4.58147.D2F7B116; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 17:19:41 +0800 (HKT) Received: from CNSHPPEXCH1604.nsn-intra.net (135.251.51.104) by CNSHPPEXCH1605.nsn-intra.net (135.251.51.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 17:19:40 +0800 Received: from CNSHPPEXCH1604.nsn-intra.net ([135.251.51.104]) by CNSHPPEXCH1604.nsn-intra.net ([135.251.51.104]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 17:19:40 +0800 From: "Dong, Shaojie (NSB - CN/Hangzhou)" To: Stephen Hemminger CC: "users@dpdk.org" , "Meunier, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-users] [DPDK 20.11] rte_eal_init() appear additional thread Thread-Index: AdeTCQInwxskD2uJQ8q5vBKovXrPTP//nBAA//8d8UA= Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 09:19:40 +0000 Message-ID: <2f3ddcfab1844606951e514b84c9d512@nokia-sbell.com> References: <07b3151ab8ee4191b11ef563ddd31d1d@nokia-sbell.com> <20210816204352.5766b854@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <20210816204352.5766b854@hermes.local> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.251.51.115] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrHLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXS/ts4U1e3XjrR4HGXmsXiO3IWzQfXszgw efxasJTVo+fkPKYApigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujDcfZArOcFec6QppYDzI2cXIySEhYCLx/dN6 5i5GLg4hgUNMEpea/rFCOH8ZJRYeO8wI4WxilLjXtIoJpIVNwENi84EZjCC2iICRxKrnHWA2 s0C+xP//34BGcXAIC/hJXN4bDlESKLHt2F52CNtK4lrTG1YQm0VAVeLp7etgNq+AnUTXlK1g NUIC6RJnd30Fi3MKGEu8v/AILM4oICsx7dF9JohV4hK3nsxngvhAQGLJnvPMELaoxMvHIA9w ANlKEn0boMp1JBbs/sQGYWtLLFv4mhliraDEyZlPWCYwis1CMnUWkpZZSFpmIWlZwMiyilHa 2S/YwyvY19PPwFTPz9/b01E32MnVx0fP2d93EyMwitZITJq7g/HC3G96hxiZOBgPMUpwMCuJ 8KpzSCUK8aYkVlalFuXHF5XmpBYfYpTmYFES5z1UIJwIDIHEktTs1NSC1CKYLBMHp1QD06F2 9zsFN08XPw+xfXGkWM6p/uwNPjH/jqWJfwo3rgzVuzRfLuyI1bIPUbsKZVmip5Yv6j76WMHr WYbJ0vn9CbZGhdYBPmuqta2y7jf+XX3n8Pd2r2atn5fPPHY+Kj3nUpHyNmm/I/x+gmYluce1 JwsulCn+Umb7e81Bw7OtEySePLWS3ifF7hGyYVU75x3+2Qb8BftufLIqMFdhfXg6a65PDZ/M GiatOc8S9s7jNjnJufJufuIl7himiO54Yesiq2+8Gq19zRuVljyTm3V29+KL/Ad+JfMv+yr7 hj3MrefQCWel9tWJjCcnZ/hefSWf8XypeDffrNqub19s6l3qlt66kS/0QXuLlt70+fdLlFiK MxINtZiLihMB4ZrQWxEDAAA= Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] [DPDK 20.11] rte_eal_init() appear additional thread X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Hi, Stephen Thanks for your quickliy reply I found the additional thread was created by following path on DPDK 20.11 v= ersion rte_eal_init()->rte_telemetry_init()->telemetry_v2_init()->pthread_create() Only call pthread_create() function to create this additional thread and th= en sleep all the time DPDK code do not set this thread's name So it inherits the main thread's name Two threads with the same name are easy to confuse by business code Does DPDK code support its name change ? It was not worker/slave thread -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Hemminger =20 Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2021 11:44 AM To: Dong, Shaojie (NSB - CN/Hangzhou) Cc: users@dpdk.org; Meunier, Julien (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] [DPDK 20.11] rte_eal_init() appear additional thr= ead On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 01:51:14 +0000 "Dong, Shaojie (NSB - CN/Hangzhou)" wrote: > Hi, DPDK expert >=20 >=20 >=20 > We updated dpdk version from 18.05 to 20.11 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Using following parameter to call rte_eal_init() with secondary=20 > instance Which additional thread? When you start rte_eal_init it needs to create sev= eral additional sleeping thread for monitoring. If you don't want the worker/slave threads then either only use a cpuset wi= th a single CPU, or don't call rte_eal_launch() =20