From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27955B0AC
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:35:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org
 ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost)
 by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>)
 id 1WuKKn-0006xY-WE; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 07:35:23 -0400
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 07:35:21 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Uri Sidler <uri.sidler@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20140610113521.GD6275@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
References: <CACxZdGrb=Tq3XyJkbnXd7WCLZOYJYwGtjFBT=9-89rQVd-WOeQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACxZdGrb=Tq3XyJkbnXd7WCLZOYJYwGtjFBT=9-89rQVd-WOeQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
X-Spam-Status: No
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] using hash table in a MP environment
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:35:09 -0000

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:02:03AM +0300, Uri Sidler wrote:
> Hi,
> I am currently using a hash table in a multi-process environment.
> the master process creates the hash table which is later used by other
> secondary processes.
> but the secondary processes fail to use the hash table since the hash
> function address actually points to a different fucntion. (this makes sense
> since the address of the hash function is in fact different per process).
> How can I solve this issue?
> 
> Thanks,
> Shirley.
> 

Use shared memory.  see shmget

Neil