On 2019/07/09 19:26, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
On 09-Jul-19 11:24 AM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
On 09-Jul-19 11:22 AM, Yasufumi Ogawa wrote:
Hi Anatoly,
On 2019/07/05 17:53, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
On 16-Apr-19 4:43 AM, ogawa.yasuf...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote:
From: Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasuf...@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 secondary is run as app container because each of
containerized secondary has PID 1. To reserve unique name, use
hostname
instead of PID if the value is 1.
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasuf...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
---
I'm not too well versed in containers - is this hostname 1) always
set, and 2) always unique?
For docker, 1) hostname is always set. 2) The hostname is decided as
short form of container ID, so it might not be unique even though
very low possibility.
I found that we can get whole container ID in `/proc/self/cgroup` as
discussed [1]. I think using hostname is reasonable way without
running many secondary processes. However, it might be better to use
64 digits full container ID instead of 12 digits short ID if ensure
uniqueness strongly. What do yo think?
[1]
https://forums.docker.com/t/get-a-containers-full-id-from-inside-of-itself/37237
I think it's better to err on the side of caution and guarantee better
uniqueness. This code will get into an LTS and will be used for years
to come :)
...however, i think a full 64-digit ID won't even fit into the fbarray
filename, as i believe it's limited to something like 64 chars. Perhaps
hostname would be enough after all... or we can increase fbarray name
length - that would require ABI breakage but the ABI is already broken
in this release, so it's OK i think.
OK.
>> Wouldn't an error in fscanf() leak the file handle? I think you need
to fclose() before checking the result.
> I would like to fix it.
I would like send v3 patch for fixing for fclose().
Thanks,
Yasufumi
