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 84F2342989; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:16:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE90E410D3; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:16:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEE9D4021F; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:16:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E5132007F1; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 08:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 19 Apr 2023 08:16:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t= 1681906609; x=1681993009; bh=cZ43J/24XEdGC0bR2fZRB6/D4MDIouZmhcP mLmBNOTU=; b=O9WFBk2++FPV+CsxGcruT2PaWjQnzbvX8f33uZFQ4YlK6w15jU0 oPvM6rojxbP64kmyBjZWZ+qUFMzAhYNa2T/pexWdbQ17anX1Y91GvaGAaLzWkaH1 pQFAsnEZT1KoYJteVOIX5+m9D8YLy2ExCVzrS7HczcCmprgUQpjOIBU5/VElreG1 3YmrdtNu1AZlt4imthtgrIghrFsM2jHZJGPJRQQMlSerKLvjx/j9oKJxbVCgJdgZ EM6fwTD+0J1Ta5f5FAFpZNRMR5BroKHUZOOQDOoaA8vCj82DsRbiNjJB9w1aYIpE 0pXomTrCiWDTY8Jk0833ygWSa7bzCUvde2g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1681906609; x=1681993009; bh=cZ43J/24XEdGC0bR2fZRB6/D4MDIouZmhcP mLmBNOTU=; b=R6YdmA65yWctXiMJkhG4aKI7v7MUrHy/XAFHppOMr+be44mRnFI +cm4y8PEjJFeHmvwBEz/rHElbNjPbwaGCQ7hP++YO789hsVDnGsTFSl3r3DRZZUe 8GQNs3mUSSaF0JtXMSO8/hOyw9v1iTvS48ocBBz33fQbbUg+pjSb+dX0IiEwqNdo eKGGH2nrucMXKvjGxcJnMrzMoHz3d4rRzvmNg+B2L/lFME7BPgpRjzSDrnd7AJZN KWMpTqRSn0Cx7yCxhhar1AEuEdtJnu3TlJn1F0TUGLo923xww4r/iSsUywQjsTSf xg4nL5elgvX6Nks/IFGnZ4YwmPKFSWZCdfA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrfedttddghedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 08:16:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "You, KaisenX" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Zhou, YidingX" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "Matz, Olivier" , "ferruh.yigit@amd.com" , "zhoumin@loongson.cn" , "stable@dpdk.org" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "jerinj@marvell.com" , "Burakov, Anatoly" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] enhance NUMA affinity heuristic Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:16:45 +0200 Message-ID: <3549930.R56niFO833@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20221221104858.296530-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 13/04/2023 02:56, You, KaisenX: > From: You, KaisenX > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > I'm not comfortable with this patch. > > > > > > First, there is no comment in the code which helps to understand the logic. > > > Second, I'm afraid changing the value of the per-core variable > > > _socket_id may have an impact on some applications. > > > > Hi Thomas, I'm sorry to bother you again, but we can't think of a better solution for now, > would you please give me some suggestion, and then I will modify it accordingly. You need to better explain the logic both in the commit message and in code comments. When it will be done, it will be easier to have a discussion with other maintainers and community experts. Thank you > > Thank you for your reply. > > First, about comments, I can submit a new patch to add comments to help > > understand. > > Second, if you do not change the value of the per-core variable_ socket_ id, > > /lib/eal/common/malloc_heap.c > > malloc_get_numa_socket(void) > > { > > const struct internal_config *conf = eal_get_internal_configuration(); > > unsigned int socket_id = rte_socket_id(); // The return value of > > "rte_socket_id()" is 1 > > unsigned int idx; > > > > if (socket_id != (unsigned int)SOCKET_ID_ANY) > > return socket_id; //so return here > > > > This will cause return here, This function returns the socket_id of unallocated > > memory. > > > > If you have a better solution, I can modify it.