From: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com> To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>, Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp> Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v6 1/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in secondary Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 12:19:00 +0900 Message-ID: <25f8c508-606e-6ede-8c8d-b8948af90e3b@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <9c3fba36-9cb2-76ad-198f-c11a63f01a9a@intel.com> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 11:31 AM >>> To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>; Yasufumi Ogawa >>> <yasufum.o@gmail.com> >>> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev >>> <dev@dpdk.org>; dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>; Yasufumi Ogawa >>> <ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in >>> secondary >>> >>> On 05-Nov-19 10:13 AM, David Marchand wrote: >>>> Hello Anatoly, Yasufumi, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 11:20 AM Burakov, Anatoly >>>> <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 01-Nov-19 9:04 AM, yasufum.o@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>> From: Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp> >>>>>> >>>>>> In secondary_msl_create_walk(), it creates a file for fbarrays >>>>>> with its >>>>>> PID for reserving unique name among secondary processes. However, it >>>>>> does not work if several secondaries run as app containers because >>>>>> each >>>>>> of containerized secondary has PID 1, and failed to reserve unique >>>>>> name >>>>>> other than first one. To reserve unique name in each of >>>>>> containers, use >>>>>> hostname in addition to PID. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >>>> >>>> We can't backport this as is, see below. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_fbarray.h | 2 +- >>>>>> lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c | 11 ++++++++--- >>>>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_fbarray.h >>>>>> b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_fbarray.h >>>>>> index 6dccdbec9..5c2815093 100644 >>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_fbarray.h >>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_fbarray.h >>>>>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ extern "C" { >>>>>> #include <rte_compat.h> >>>>>> #include <rte_rwlock.h> >>>>>> >>>>>> -#define RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN 64 >>>>>> +#define RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN NAME_MAX >>>> >>>> The change on RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN breaks the ABI, so we cannot >>>> backport this as is. >>>> For 19.11, we can allow this breakage, but we need an update of the >>>> release notes. OK. I wasn't careful for the ABI change. I think RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN 64 is enough without using hostname as a part of fbarray. So I would like to discard this change. >>>> >>>> Besides, what is the impact in terms of memory consumption? >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> struct rte_fbarray { >>>>>> char name[RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN]; /**< name associated with >>>>>> an array */ >>>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c >>>>>> b/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c >>>>>> index af6d0d023..24f0275c9 100644 >>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c >>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c >>>>>> @@ -1365,6 +1365,7 @@ secondary_msl_create_walk(const struct >>>>>> rte_memseg_list *msl, >>>>>> struct rte_memseg_list *primary_msl, *local_msl; >>>>>> char name[PATH_MAX]; >>>>>> int msl_idx, ret; >>>>>> + char hostname[HOST_NAME_MAX] = { 0 }; >>>>>> >>>>>> if (msl->external) >>>>>> return 0; >>>>>> @@ -1373,9 +1374,13 @@ secondary_msl_create_walk(const struct >>>>>> rte_memseg_list *msl, >>>>>> primary_msl = &mcfg->memsegs[msl_idx]; >>>>>> local_msl = &local_memsegs[msl_idx]; >>>>>> >>>>>> - /* create distinct fbarrays for each secondary */ >>>>>> - snprintf(name, RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN, "%s_%i", >>>>>> - primary_msl->memseg_arr.name, getpid()); >>>>>> + /* Create distinct fbarrays for each secondary by using PID and >>>>>> + * hostname. The reason why using hostname is because PID >>>>>> could be >>>>>> + * duplicated among secondaries if it is launched in a >>>>>> container. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + gethostname(hostname, HOST_NAME_MAX); >>>> >>>> Personal preference, s/HOST_NAME_MAX/sizeof(hostname)/. >>>> >>>> >>>> hostname[] is HOST_NAME_MAX bytes long. >>>> In the worst case, we can get a non NULL terminated hostname string. >>>> " >>>> gethostname() returns the null-terminated hostname in the >>>> character array name, which has a length of len bytes. If the >>>> null-terminated hostname is too large to fit, then the name is >>>> truncated, and >>>> no error is returned (but see NOTES below). POSIX.1-2001 says >>>> that if such truncation occurs, then it is unspecified whether the >>>> returned buffer includes a terminating null byte. >>>> ... >>>> NOTES >>>> SUSv2 guarantees that "Host names are limited to 255 bytes". >>>> POSIX.1-2001 guarantees that "Host names (not including the >>>> terminating null byte) are limited to HOST_NAME_MAX bytes". On >>>> Linux, >>>> HOST_NAME_MAX is defined with the value 64, which has been the >>>> limit since Linux 1.0 (earlier kernels imposed a limit of 8 bytes). >>>> " >>>> >>>> How about making hostname[] HOST_NAME_MAX+1 bytes long? >>>> >>>>>> + snprintf(name, RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN, "%s_%s_%d", >>>>>> + primary_msl->memseg_arr.name, hostname, >>>>>> (int)getpid()); >>>>>> >>>>>> ret = rte_fbarray_init(&local_msl->memseg_arr, name, >>>>>> primary_msl->memseg_arr.len, >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think the order should be reversed. Both containers and >>>>> non-containers >>>>> can have their hostname set, and RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN is of fairly >>>>> limited length, so if the hostname is long enough, the PID never gets >>>>> into the name string, resulting in duplicates. It is better have >>>>> pid first. >>>> >>>> Anatoly, >>>> >>>> On the principle, it seems better, yes. >>>> Just the comment on RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN indicates that you missed the >>>> change at the top of the patch. >>>> What do you think of this change? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, i did miss that, apologies. >>> >>> I don't have a strong opinion on this change, however the above comment >>> would still be true if we make fbarray size to be hostname_max + 1 - we >>> still potentially get no space for a pid. So if we're going to have pid >>> in there as well, it should be hostname_max + pid_max (5 digits?) + >>> whatever underscores we have + null terminator, to ensure it fits under >>> any and all circumstances.# In "man 5 proc", it says the default value of pid_max is 32768, but can be set up to 2^22 (=4194304) on 64-bit systems. So, I think it is safer to consider pid_max is 7 digits. I can find secondary's fbarray file named as $ sudo ls /var/run/dpdk/rte/ ... fbarray_memseg-1048576k-0-0_24118 fbarray_memseg-1048576k-0-0_24191 fbarray_memseg-1048576k-0-0_24199 ... It consists of [prefix]-[hugepage size]-[numa node?]-[memchan?]_[PID]", and size of the name before PID is totally 28 digits. If another underscore and hostname are included in the name, the max size of fbarray file name is 28 + 7(PID) + 1(underscore) + HOST_NAME_MAX+1(null terminator) Considering 28 can be larger, how about using 32 as following? + int fbarray_sec_name_len = 32 + 7 + 1 + HOST_NAME_MAX + 1; + snprintf(name, fbarray_sec_name_len, "%s_%d_%s", + primary_msl->memseg_arr.name, getpid(), hostname); >> >> I think that at least on linux we have more than enough space here: >> >> $ find /usr/include -type f | xargs grep ' NAME_MAX' | grep define >> /usr/include/linux/limits.h:#define NAME_MAX 255 /* # >> chars in a file name */ >> >> $ find /usr/include -type f | xargs grep ' HOST_NAME_MAX' | grep define >> /usr/include/i386-linux-gnu/bits/local_lim.h:#define >> HOST_NAME_MAX 64 >> /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/local_lim.h:#define >> HOST_NAME_MAX 64 >> > > Okay, works for me :) Thanks, Yasufumi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-08 3:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-16 1:59 [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] fbarray: get fbarrays from containerized secondary ogawa.yasufumi 2019-04-16 3:43 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 0/1] Get " ogawa.yasufumi 2019-04-16 3:43 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 1/1] fbarray: get " ogawa.yasufumi 2019-07-04 20:17 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Thomas Monjalon 2019-07-05 8:53 ` [dpdk-stable] " Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-09 10:22 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-07-09 10:24 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-09 10:26 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-11 9:37 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-07-11 9:43 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-11 10:31 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3 0/1] " yasufum.o 2019-07-11 10:31 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3 1/1] " yasufum.o 2019-07-11 10:53 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-11 11:57 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-07-11 13:14 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-12 2:22 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-07-22 1:06 ` Ogawa Yasufumi 2019-07-22 9:33 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-22 9:25 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-24 8:20 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4 0/1] " yasufum.o 2019-07-24 8:20 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4 1/1] " yasufum.o 2019-07-24 9:59 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-30 8:16 ` Thomas Monjalon 2019-07-30 9:18 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-07-31 5:48 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-10-11 9:36 ` David Marchand 2019-10-25 15:36 ` David Marchand 2019-10-25 19:54 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-10-26 16:15 ` David Marchand 2019-10-26 18:11 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-10-28 8:07 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 0/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in secondary yasufum.o 2019-10-28 8:07 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 1/1] " yasufum.o 2019-10-29 12:03 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-10-30 13:42 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-10-30 19:00 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-10-31 10:03 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-10-31 10:32 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-01 9:04 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v6 0/1] " yasufum.o 2019-11-01 9:04 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v6 1/1] " yasufum.o 2019-11-01 12:01 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-04 10:20 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-11-05 10:13 ` David Marchand 2019-11-05 11:31 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-11-05 11:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-06 10:37 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-11-08 3:19 ` Yasufumi Ogawa [this message] 2019-11-13 21:43 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v7 0/1] " yasufum.o 2019-11-13 21:43 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v7 1/1] " yasufum.o 2019-11-14 10:01 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-11-14 11:42 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-11-14 12:27 ` David Marchand 2019-11-26 19:40 ` Yasufumi Ogawa 2019-11-27 10:26 ` Burakov, Anatoly 2019-11-14 12:55 ` David Marchand 2019-11-14 17:32 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=25f8c508-606e-6ede-8c8d-b8948af90e3b@gmail.com \ --to=yasufum.o@gmail.com \ --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \ --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \ --cc=dev@dpdk.org \ --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \ --cc=ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp \ --cc=stable@dpdk.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
patches for DPDK stable branches This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/stable/0 stable/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 stable stable/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/stable \ stable@dpdk.org public-inbox-index stable Example config snippet for mirrors. Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.stable AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git