From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se (smtp-3.sys.kth.se [130.237.48.192]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9C51B43A for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649C958BD; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:28 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-3.sys.kth.se ([127.0.0.1]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (smtp-3.sys.kth.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id hidu53JPo8cg; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from exdb02.ug.kth.se (unknown [192.168.32.112]) by smtp-3.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98C721C6A; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:21 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kth.se; s=default; t=1543502607; bh=Bq+uxg6wsq2FZis9xuhOBDx1pzyRmgBk+ZftpZxjnjk=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To; b=XsEJduC7dSv0tdWCrNSzdSdstGyVjTKCMAc81VDdUnlYfLPW9IcUumAIZIachzZEI fVm8jL3dd3VgNsl9WF4vfjAm708vDlTDQ2ZEEGu9Yr5N+Y4/KyuTBcL6M7t2iqqIhR EVDPTumCaQsy23lu6af30VMXaHBauUxHHJZIoOac= Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.115) by exdb02.ug.kth.se (192.168.32.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:20 +0100 Received: from exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) by exdb05.ug.kth.se ([192.168.32.115]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:43:20 +0100 From: Tom Barbette To: Ferruh Yigit , Alejandro Lucero , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Thomas Monjalon , Andrew Rybchenko , Anatoly Burakov , Bruce Richardson , John Daley , Shahaf Shuler , Adrien Mazarguil , Konstantin Ananyev , Stephen Hemminger , Qi Zhang , Jerin Jacob Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/nfp: add multiprocess support Thread-Index: AQHUhw4MhPQJ+DDIAEGvuRlTekeN9KVlYMQAgAFxV5I= Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 14:43:20 +0000 Message-ID: <1543502600032.88549@kth.se> References: <20181128113220.19840-1-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>, <56a0dbab-20e1-9a46-bbfe-3081dea0744d@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <56a0dbab-20e1-9a46-bbfe-3081dea0744d@intel.com> Accept-Language: fr-FR, sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [130.237.20.142] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/nfp: add multiprocess support X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 14:43:29 -0000 Ferruh Yigit wrote: > According my understanding, > Only *one* DPDK application (primary or secondary) should control a devic= e. > There is no restriction in DPDK for it, this responsibility is pushed to > application, application should manage it. ... > Device initialization (probe()) done only by primary application. I'm jumping in the thread because this is not clear actually. As a somehow = long-standing DPDK multiprocess user, I think it would be good to take the = occasion to make clarifications (in the docs and not only on the mailing li= st) about what can be done between processes. Eg following your thought, a master/slave approach is not allowed by DPDK. Example : currently changing the RETA table with mlx5 will crash all slaves= currently reading packets from the target device. So much for dynamically = scaling. Can we let calling all this set of (undocumented) functions that should not= be called between processes be "the fault of the user" if it crashes? Tom