From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.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: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:41:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C800B7@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d7a0729c-eb4d-d87a-4f7a-0d94627010e4@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.
> >
> > 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.#
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
>
> Wrt memory usage, honestly, we don't live in a "640K should be enough
> for everyone" era any more. I don't see this being a major issue. This
> is not a hotpath, and we reserve half a terabyte of virtual memory at
> startup as it is. A few kilo/megabytes more isn't going to make much of
> a difference here.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Anatoly
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-05 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ 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 [this message]
2019-11-06 10:37 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-11-08 3:19 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
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
2023-06-13 16:51 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] fbarray: get fbarrays from containerized secondary Stephen Hemminger
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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C800B7@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=yasufum.o@gmail.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).