From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E57A05D3 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:50:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BD001B6CF; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:50:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DAB1B6CA for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 16:50:38 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Apr 2019 07:50:37 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,397,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="154001063" Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.92.20]) ([10.251.92.20]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 Apr 2019 07:50:36 -0700 To: "Suanming.Mou" , "Varghese, Vipin" , "Pattan, Reshma" Cc: "'dev@dpdk.org'" References: <1556210141-43153-1-git-send-email-mousuanming@huawei.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33DEB0@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <25e85f37-231e-d303-8d7a-e3addd6534d5@huawei.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33E2C8@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D33E2E3@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <0de4a0d5-85fa-8290-20af-62fdf66e2e94@huawei.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <1144691f-7aeb-5300-cb54-9fa57d538a75@intel.com> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:50:35 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0de4a0d5-85fa-8290-20af-62fdf66e2e94@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/pdump: exits once primary app exited 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Message-ID: <20190426145035.NIY38Lk1CBcQuj5ORQeZB2RywWhQFwc8e3bGj5hktAA@z> On 26-Apr-19 3:49 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote: > > On 2019/4/26 22:39, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: >> On 26-Apr-19 3:32 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote: >>> >>> On 2019/4/26 21:46, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: >>>> On 26-Apr-19 1:08 PM, Suanming.Mou wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 2019/4/26 18:56, Varghese, Vipin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I will leave this suggestion open for comments from the maintainer. >>>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your suggestion. I have also tried to add an slave core >>>>> to monitor the primary status this afternoon.  It works. >>>>> >>>>> I doubt if it can be add an new option as you suggested, but which >>>>> will also require people who complain the exiting to add an extra >>>>> slave core for that. >>>>> >>>>> Please waiting for the new patch in one or two days. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You can use alarm API to check for this regularly. It's not like the >>>> interrupt thread is doing much anyway. Just set alarm to fire every >>>> N seconds, and that's it. >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thank you very much for the suggestion. Yes, that seems the best >>> solution.  Just tested it roughly as the code below: >>> >>> +static void monitor_primary(void *arg __rte_unused) >>> +{ >>> +    if (quit_signal) >>> +        return; >>> + >>> +    if (rte_eal_primary_proc_alive(NULL)) >>> +        rte_eal_alarm_set(MONITOR_INTERVEL, monitor_primary, NULL); >>> +    else >>> +        quit_signal = 1; >>> + >>> +    return; >>> +} >>> + >>>   static inline void >>>   dump_packets(void) >>>   { >>>       int i; >>>       uint32_t lcore_id = 0; >>> >>> +    if (exit_with_primary) >>> +        rte_eal_alarm_set(MONITOR_INTERVEL, monitor_primary, NULL); >>> + >>> >>> >>> I will prepare the patch with option exit_with_primary. >>> >> >> Actually, i'm curious if this really does work. Unless my knowledge is >> out of date, interrupt thread doesn't work in secondary processes, and >> by extension neither should the alarm API... > > Uh... If I understand correctly, the alarm API has used in the secondary > before. > > Refer to handle_primary_request().... > Then my knowledge really is out of date :) -- Thanks, Anatoly