2018-07-10 17:00 GMT+02:00 Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>:
> On 10-Jul-18 3:54 PM, thiery.ouatt...@outscale.com wrote: > >> From: Kignelman OUATTARA <thiery.ouatt...@outscale.com> >> >> in last version (v18.02), we was using no-huge option to >> start 2 dpdk instances simultanusly (for testing purpose). >> >> but since v18.05 when we start 2 instances: >> - the first dpdk app start normaly >> - the 2nd can't start because LOCK_EX option is set in >> flock(fd, LOCK_EX | LOCK_NB). >> >> So i did this patch to change LOCK_EX to LOCK_SH if no-huge >> option is set. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kignelman OUATTARA <thiery.ouatt...@outscale.com> >> --- >> > > Hi Kignelman, > > I don't think this is safe to do. Even though hugepage memory is not used, > the --no-huge mode still stores page segments in fbarrays, so while you > would be able to *run* DPDK in such a scenario, the second process would > corrupt the memory of the first. > > As a proper alternative, i would suggest looking at my --in-memory mode > patchset: > > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40582/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40583/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40585/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40584/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40587/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40586/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40588/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40590/ > http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/40589/ > > This will solve the problem at its source. > > -- > Thanks, > Anatoly > Hi Anatoly, Thanks for your reply, i will test with your patches Thanks, Kignelman
