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 BB88E41D3D for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 23:38:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B9140ED9; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 23:38:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-lj1-f179.google.com (mail-lj1-f179.google.com [209.85.208.179]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29BD540156 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 23:38:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lj1-f179.google.com with SMTP id by8so3847876ljb.7 for ; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 14:38:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1677883085; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uNzMTzmqfaTsKso2vBgOjwWHwZIXXzeQZaaKpbE4Ko4=; b=EjwvQTJqcv/0YJD74o4fue8PE5lxk3s/iunNo619gYL3jcpahtwcHsCQgWFPXJMgaD I9uHWaUBErXCcWNRJEAkZ7LSe3d1YTncTAynC0b178HiwOD5lqAV1Fs2vI/K1B3SgE24 HXW8AuiOX5WDf1Oc8VqIfY0UCwxmmvB199h94DgS2U8X1InyU7p/zk0ZF7HCrklcpmNd 2K88AyiX3gAy/KAaDvtIN72IIG6skUWPoqXYtus+4HA4VDu8kKf2xVNh9PqxhgPFJYMj Kyw1OYgU5+t3udE5FfrKDY2FrEi08fBhAWEaNuSXoRAem41IaoY3JFcT6KFpI+QRpuyA FaqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1677883085; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=uNzMTzmqfaTsKso2vBgOjwWHwZIXXzeQZaaKpbE4Ko4=; b=4KkCi06jIrEJ1PXE9JTrXxS1iqzIPCZkN9WKJ6xP8UUt6RLGT2HeXpMzMPstnZxoSQ XET5x80HghMQ9tQ48XKWc6b1XwoyUOvj/kKlekRp74ylJ2sho4Q6CYWGxhuoP+TQrZK/ SzSp2k9xdv6B7BYQegRS7vPGFArqHccBHxfzm8OsImrjRf8tjQM/GcuddNZSf7Fp5XGl VTuBPtYu7TPk+zWrj6DeltwrzhYH6VofBFUdYP1GWuVAjJ9bbemxHXJOMTSe9Fiy1g0V +R88WAbtCxh0o4XggUAgIHwFNZSYypevH/mvy7PXWp4GGnHjKopYHTcilweYhdljmEj0 wj8A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKX53MNHXYYl2b6i1I0vk9ghhY4KqufuFSZ8cFw5egGcYtGdqQZl YTSIpkeLWaxRgjLCCrzjjs8P95V2GJybhcuQ3HRTrLDmssE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8hjf3UrRxwNIhBByKsFq9CuezsU8yHLWroJTp45DxYvtqmwbFqfKjhENRKk9yfqtThHSqMQwnbfeIn69/1sXA= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b94a:0:b0:295:acc0:3017 with SMTP id 10-20020a2eb94a000000b00295acc03017mr1065412ljs.4.1677883085351; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 14:38:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230303141823.09bf1563@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <20230303141823.09bf1563@hermes.local> From: Isaac Boukris Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2023 00:37:53 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Multi-process limitations when using the dumpcap tool To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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 On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 12:18 AM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 12:33:20 +0200 > Isaac Boukris wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > The dumpcap documentation points out that it runs as a secondary process, > > as such I was wondering whether the multi-process limitations such as the > > requirement to disable ASLR on both processes, and more importantly the > > limitations regarding the use of librte_hash, also apply when using the > > dumpcap tool? > > > > Thanks! > > Dumpcap is passive and have not heard of any problems related to ASLR. I realized upon sending that the librte_hash limitation is likely only when sharing tables between processes, I guess that's what you mean by passive. Thanks!