From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B9E2C2F for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 17:01:06 +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 orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Jul 2018 08:01:05 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,335,1526367600"; d="scan'208";a="73658986" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.102]) ([10.237.220.102]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Jul 2018 08:00:52 -0700 To: thiery.ouattara@outscale.com, dev@dpdk.org References: <1531234465-31339-1-git-send-email-thiery.ouattara@outscale.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:00:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1531234465-31339-1-git-send-email-thiery.ouattara@outscale.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: allow start two dpdk with no-huge option 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: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:01:07 -0000 On 10-Jul-18 3:54 PM, thiery.ouattara@outscale.com wrote: > From: Kignelman OUATTARA > > in last version (v18.02), we was using no-huge option to > start 2 dpdk instances simultanusly (for testing purpose). > > but since v18.05 when we start 2 instances: > - the first dpdk app start normaly > - the 2nd can't start because LOCK_EX option is set in > flock(fd, LOCK_EX | LOCK_NB). > > So i did this patch to change LOCK_EX to LOCK_SH if no-huge > option is set. > > Signed-off-by: Kignelman OUATTARA > --- Hi Kignelman, I don't think this is safe to do. Even though hugepage memory is not used, the --no-huge mode still stores page segments in fbarrays, so while you would be able to *run* DPDK in such a scenario, the second process would corrupt the memory of the first. As a proper alternative, i would suggest looking at my --in-memory mode patchset: http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40582/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40583/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40585/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40584/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40587/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40586/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40588/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40590/ http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40589/ This will solve the problem at its source. -- Thanks, Anatoly