From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] eal: clean up unused files on initialization Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:47:43 +0000 Message-ID: <821e4582-5594-d291-6047-d6e5ba7b120f@intel.com> References: <88cced4f601c44c6203b9adb09abacdce0b3a260.1542122595.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <7096e585fd36399cea92dd32fe1f19b051697bec.1542124270.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <2394199.rkv9bdJ101@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Bruce Richardson , vipin.varghese@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2394199.rkv9bdJ101@xps> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 13-Nov-18 4:57 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 13/11/2018 16:54, Anatoly Burakov: >> When creating process data structures, EAL will create many files >> in EAL runtime directory. Because we allow multiple secondary >> processes to run, each secondary process gets their own unique >> file. With many secondary processes running and exiting on the >> system, runtime directory will, over time, create enormous amounts >> of sockets, fbarray files and other stuff that just sits there >> unused because the process that allocated it has died a long time >> ago. This may lead to exhaustion of disk (or RAM) space in the >> runtime directory. >> >> Fix this by removing every unlocked file at initialization that >> matches either socket or fbarray naming convention. We cannot be >> sure of any other files, so we'll leave them alone. Also, remove >> similar code from mp socket code. >> >> We do it at the end of init, rather than at the beginning, because >> secondary process will use primary process' data structures even >> if the primary itself has died, and we don't want to remove those >> before we lock them. >> >> Bugzilla ID: 106 >> >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >> >> Reported-by: Vipin Varghese >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov > > I feel it is too big and too late for 18.11. > Can we move it to 19.02? > From maintainer's point of view, i agree that it's too risky to merge into 18.11 at this stage. My input should probably stop there, but Vipin (the original bug reporter) may have other thoughts on this matter. -- Thanks, Anatoly