> -----Original Message----- > From: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> > Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 11:31 AM > To: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>; Yasufumi Ogawa > <yasufu...@gmail.com> > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; > dpdk stable <sta...@dpdk.org>; Yasufumi Ogawa > <ogawa.yasuf...@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.bura...@intel.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 01-Nov-19 9:04 AM, yasufu...@gmail.com 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 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: sta...@dpdk.org > > > > We can't backport this as is, see below. > > > > > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufu...@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