From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
To: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.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: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v7 1/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in secondary
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:26:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5a6a7a1-99a0-94e8-8a86-00fb07f2b432@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf8ddd01-78aa-18c0-1442-fcd1ab9f5164@gmail.com>
On 26-Nov-19 7:40 PM, Yasufumi Ogawa wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Sorry for slow reply.
>
> On 2019/11/14 21:27, David Marchand wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:42 PM Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2019/11/14 2:01, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
>>>> On 13-Nov-19 9:43 PM, 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
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
>>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c
>>>>> b/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c
>>>>> index af6d0d023..11de6d4d6 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c
>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_memalloc.c
>>>>> @@ -1365,6 +1365,12 @@ 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+1] = { 0 };
>>>>> + /* filename of secondary's fbarray is defined such as
>>>>> + * "fbarray_memseg-1048576k-0-0_PID_HOSTNAME" and length of PID
>>>>> + * can be 7 digits maximumly.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + int fbarray_sec_name_len = 32 + 7 + 1 + HOST_NAME_MAX + 1;
>>>>
>>>> What does 32 stand for? Maybe #define both 32 and 7 values?
>>> Hi Anatoly,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comments! If my understanding is correct, the prefix
>>> "fbarray_memseg-1048576k-0-0_" is 28 digits and it could be larger if
>>> using the size of hugepage or the number of NUMA nodes are larger
>>> possibly. However, I think 32 digits is still enough.
>>>
>>> > Maybe #define both 32 and 7 values?
>>> Yes. I think it should be better to use #define if this values are
>>> referred several times.
>>
>>
>> We can truncate to RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN in all cases.
>> And iiuc, rte_fbarray_init will refuse any longer name anyway.
> Could I confirm the issue? I've understood that it is failed to validate
> the name of fbarray in fully_validate() at
> "lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c:697".
>
> static int
> fully_validate(const char *name, unsigned int elt_sz, unsigned int len)
> {
> if (name == NULL || elt_sz == 0 || len == 0 || len > INT_MAX) {
> rte_errno = EINVAL;
> return -1;
> }
>
> if (strnlen(name, RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN) == RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN) {
> rte_errno = ENAMETOOLONG;
> return -1;
> }
> return 0;
> }
>
> I should overwrite the definition of RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN as previous
> patch in this case, and it causes an ABI breakage, right? If so, I would
> like to make the change and give up to update stable release.
>
> Thanks,
> Yasufumi
>
It seems we're getting into bikeshedding...
We can do this without ABI breakage. You could have just used
RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN as max fbarray name length for fbarray_sec_name_len
(i.e. that would include hostname + pid + whatever else there is). The
name, as David has pointed out, would be truncated to
RTE_FBARRAY_NAME_LEN anyway (or, more precisely, it will be refused if
it's longer than that), so this is the most you can have - so you can
just use that as the maximum.
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-27 10:26 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
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 [this message]
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=a5a6a7a1-99a0-94e8-8a86-00fb07f2b432@intel.com \
--to=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 \
--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).