From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66A8343053; Sun, 13 Aug 2023 17:52:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2977540F16; Sun, 13 Aug 2023 17:52:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f182.google.com (mail-pf1-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1780440E0F for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2023 17:52:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f182.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-686ba97e4feso3465145b3a.0 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2023 08:52:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1691941924; x=1692546724; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=GhYVKCBGuVZsMU9bvBYb8MxF2Ri9NtTQbn3HWS5XhCw=; b=Q/bCWWSv9qmU5Q+1FhycMmnOYmCpvCGcn6nCh5tLoBRhEekczwj39LBd5KS+bFeyn5 VoardRNwRvuEPZCRt9qeM3Wdd2ajILyfMe7hweOQYUXU4tTJiZgoTfVSEeBuVjxo2G9Z ktH5R1JoxY4IJA3Zx3P9Dr60/p8KFmMSLFm4XVR7faQ5jTR4I1Ildq2BwuZb+nJMjvF+ AUm/OectXp2BAAQBakiZ3EYEJTzfxhGTEDCA7xKw1JtcVD72aow+ufbaCJdf2PfnYt7x yieCB9URHg1kD8YgxG/aYuYxUrGxiUlqeY7fWm6F+ATNcKcq7WVgukOY5SNRBiF5S/de Uqcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1691941924; x=1692546724; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GhYVKCBGuVZsMU9bvBYb8MxF2Ri9NtTQbn3HWS5XhCw=; b=aqttslzBaUh3sJS/sVk3XcnCl4Kvf62DfaPWpfxSw9/tP6p/NOkX3x4VZ/UQVV114s WCCF2cdLWpfzg33yVISwiy3H0oZjL3E5gvZ9lG5e2mIcXaAPycs+Vy7HZCMEiwRwyhaS 1EyQzNmMflSvFkg8pYsmS6lGU6yrNEE/M6ksI2vzJS1jH2xSiXnjSUIC/2hbl/ERq9fa KF25I8PFk+VFVd07Sbu6MYLotn17JCMVREhpmEe10zEGQUcq6qL63+yFjsd/ndFaGEJ4 usx8RlYSMrXazn7nvpRXONyF0psc4M8uQtVi6PUXMeJWfVDPeYsugYMo2fWjZMkcqefR 6aaw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwRttxqmQXG2Ehj5AEVSTKyVAWU6OY4EhDeJSY0LP2xX88x+O9H ZAnqE2LkTZbtNs18quj9lgNW1w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEkMD5MNAL1s8BmE4hc6JUIdYoCSsct02eYsN6VCQl1abJAzfJbLiqJK0gvfdYueJqfciYaGg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:3a0b:b0:687:1603:b2e7 with SMTP id fj11-20020a056a003a0b00b006871603b2e7mr9290573pfb.8.1691941923905; Sun, 13 Aug 2023 08:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-127-207.wavecable.com. [204.195.127.207]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w21-20020aa78595000000b00686f048bb9dsm6415353pfn.74.2023.08.13.08.52.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 13 Aug 2023 08:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2023 08:52:01 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: "Varghese, Vipin" Cc: "thomas@monjalon.net" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Yigit, Ferruh" Subject: Re: [PATCH] usertools: suggest use of hwloc for new cpu Message-ID: <20230813085201.719e7a73@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20230812005720.997-1-vipin.varghese@amd.com> <20230812080025.7626a94d@hermes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 02:12:03 +0000 "Varghese, Vipin" wrote: > > > > On Sat, 12 Aug 2023 06:27:20 +0530 > > Vipin Varghese wrote: > > > > > Most modern processor now supports numa by partitioning NUMA based on > > > CPU-IO & Last Level Cache within the same socket. > > > As per the discussion in mailing list, suggesting the make use of > > > hw-loc for such scenarios. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vipin Varghese > > > > NAK, no scripting hwloc, it is ugly and creates a dependency that is not listed > > in DPDK packaging. > > There is no calls to hwloc within in thescript. Hence not clear what does ` NAK, no scripting hwloc it is ugly and creates a dependency that is not listed in DPDK packaging.`. > > Requesting to cross check why NAK is shared for `print` as suggestion. Hence, I have disagree to this. Sorry, I misinterpreted what the print's were doing. Better off not to list exact flags, the lstopo may change and user may want different format anyway. How about something like this? doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 5 +++++ usertools/cpu_layout.py | 5 +++++ 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst index 317875c5054b..25a116900dfb 100644 --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst @@ -185,3 +185,8 @@ Deprecation Notices will be deprecated and subsequently removed in DPDK 24.11 release. Before this, the new port library API (functions rte_swx_port_*) will gradually transition from experimental to stable status. + +* cpulayout: The CPU layout script is unable to deal with all the possible + complexities of modern CPU topology. Other existing tools offer more + features and do a better job with keeping up with innovations. + Therefore it will be deprecated and removed in a future release. diff --git a/usertools/cpu_layout.py b/usertools/cpu_layout.py index 891b9238fa19..37a4f9ff24b4 100755 --- a/usertools/cpu_layout.py +++ b/usertools/cpu_layout.py @@ -62,3 +62,8 @@ else: output += " " * (max_core_map_len + 1) print(output) + +print("") +print("This tool is unable to cope with complex NUMA layouts") +print("and will be removed in a future release.") +print("Suggest using lstopo or similar tools instead.") -- 2.39.2