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: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 10:20:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <88cced4f601c44c6203b9adb09abacdce0b3a260.1542122595.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <821e4582-5594-d291-6047-d6e5ba7b120f@intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2BE984@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <2137402.5xZ7V9L5Yp@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "stable@dpdk.org" , ferruh.yigit@intel.com To: Thomas Monjalon , "Varghese, Vipin" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2137402.5xZ7V9L5Yp@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 14-Nov-18 3:44 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 14/11/2018 04:24, Varghese, Vipin: >> Tested-by: Vipin Varghese >> >> >> >>>>> 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 >> >> Thanks Anatoly for the patch which clean-ups the tmpfs. This unblock the client from critical stopper too. >> >>>> >>>> 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. >> >> Hi Thomas, without the fix it affects both dpdk and non dpdk application use a host or VM. My suggestion to have the fix in and port to 18.11 LTS too. > > It is changing a behaviour. > I propose to test it on 19.02 and backport it in 18.11.1. > > Any other opinion? > That would probably be the best compromise IMO. -- Thanks, Anatoly