From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
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: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in secondary
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:31:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7a0729c-eb4d-d87a-4f7a-0d94627010e4@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJFAV8xPPu8kDNcjUycvWKjUBc3YuOT_ZQ_aDjrD4-yW3JgiEg@mail.gmail.com>
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.
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 11:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-16 1:59 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] fbarray: get fbarrays from containerized secondary ogawa.yasufumi
2019-04-16 3:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/1] Get " ogawa.yasufumi
2019-04-16 3:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/1] fbarray: get " ogawa.yasufumi
2019-07-04 20:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-05 8:53 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-07-09 10:22 ` 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-dev] [PATCH v3 0/1] " yasufum.o
2019-07-11 10:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [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-dev] [PATCH v4 0/1] " yasufum.o
2019-07-24 8:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/1] " yasufum.o
2019-07-24 9:59 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-07-30 8:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-30 9:18 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-07-31 5:48 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-10-11 9:36 ` [dpdk-dev] " 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-dev] [PATCH v5 0/1] fbarray: fix duplicated fbarray file in secondary yasufum.o
2019-10-28 8:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/1] " yasufum.o
2019-10-29 12:03 ` 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-dev] [PATCH v6 0/1] " yasufum.o
2019-11-01 9:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [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 [this message]
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-dev] [PATCH v7 0/1] " yasufum.o
2019-11-13 21:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [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
2019-11-29 5:44 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-12-02 10:43 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-12-05 20:13 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-11-14 12:55 ` David Marchand
2019-11-14 17:32 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-11-27 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/1] " Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-11-27 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/1] " Yasufumi Ogawa
2019-12-06 10:44 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-12-06 13:18 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
2020-02-14 7:46 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
2020-02-14 15:08 ` David Marchand
2020-02-14 15:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-02-17 12:54 ` Yasufumi Ogawa
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=d7a0729c-eb4d-d87a-4f7a-0d94627010e4@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).