[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] Balanced allocation of hugepages

[Sergio Gonzalez Monroy]

On 20/06/2017 15:35, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 20/06/2017 15:58, Ilya Maximets:
>> On 20.06.2017 16:07, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> 19/06/2017 13:10, Hemant Agrawal:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 02:21:58PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>>>>>> So, there are 2 option:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      1. Return back config option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
>>>>>>>>         from the first version of the patch and disable it by default.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      2. Keep patch as it is now and make everyone install libnuma
>>>>>>>>         for successful build.
>>>> +1 for option 1
>>>> It will be a issue and undesired dependency for SoCs, not supporting
>>>> NUMA architecture.
>>>>
>>>> It can be added to the config, who desired to use it by default.
>>> Yes I agree, it cannot be a dependency for architectures which
>>> do not support NUMA.
>>> Please can we rework the patch so that only one node is assumed
>>> if NUMA is disabled for the architecture?

Ilya, I missed that libnuma is not supported on ARM.

>> We're still don't have dynamic build time configuration system.
>> To make get/set_mempolicy work we need to include <numaif.h>
>> and have libnuma for successful linkage.
>> This means that the only option to not have libnuma as dependency
>> is to return back configuration option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
>> as it was in the first version of the patch.
>>
>> There is, actually, the third option (besides 2 already described):
>>
>> 	3. Return back config option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
>> 	   from the first version of the patch and *enable* it by default.
>> 	   In this case anyone who doesn't want to have libnuma as dependency
>> 	   will be able to disable the config option manually.
>>
>> Thomas, what do you think? Bruce? Sergio?
> It should be enabled on x86 and ppc, and disabled in other
> default configurations (ARM for now).

Agree.

>> P.S. We're always able to implement syscall wrappers by hands without any
>>       external dependencies, but I don't think it's a good decision.
> I agree to use libnuma instead of re-inventing the wheel.
> Let's just make it optional at build time and fallback on one node
> if disabled.

That is the simple way out.

Sergio