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 4C95D426CC; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 09:51:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1DC402A8; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 09:50:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079594014F for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2023 09:50:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1696578657; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PJZue09Ind0QiLS8Bm/sLrwnGgljy8PorTtxOj15vEg=; b=iEVARCtg6+jjuqvHYKR10RsrRN7aV0gJq/PSO0wq+oh+hjeM2dtl8OoiMKsPObXEkemmUD JkQV6SriAceuza5VGEOD1rsl4UDyiSm2kEtynl81qtHnZZvEuBmLi1QDEzj9HlWBuzxjyZ TNDP3VtnuxikopdGVZSMUDOCkPsx0Vg= Received: from mail-lj1-f199.google.com (mail-lj1-f199.google.com [209.85.208.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-632-8Sc7FpSYOdyTo0HydGiK8g-1; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 03:50:46 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 8Sc7FpSYOdyTo0HydGiK8g-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f199.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2bfeaf8cc4bso15960411fa.0 for ; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:50:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1696578644; x=1697183444; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=PJZue09Ind0QiLS8Bm/sLrwnGgljy8PorTtxOj15vEg=; b=Ei7aGqUzZnWWdoXYitUIGjTn3Z22YWcS5AU0cmZIw02QkoXlmCgApU1ftChrZAamA2 OVVC3iQxZzVuFAA/lwgcIoTak+zHKOT4U8CHe4aNssGRI5jgfP7Jcb5AIZUUbsaS1+9A mVHRwMhuoiSMnlnodvZqNczC0p7jLxGGl40GYCOj3mB8xrMl4kQ+sD2a4YRw8xe2dET0 bU8Iv0nvuYjHXfr4sn/W3U9hjc3eU9S5/eUzejhgWm00TMPpUQm4koyhAp9N5fysYD8m Uif9y1oSj6l+znjk2n0BXoro6EojhdBYdyed0cW2EOVq/Sc+JrIKdf3E7uwhiS4B5TQb 3IiQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw+g3W1w8mTqitnz9r2XPiqRpVGaci28pbT4TpxvpuOmbBvaaG2 eMT312yfrkBh0Tv3nZfu60C/UuQ1ccA51FzITPyp/gtiwCsj/rJsQt5hq6vEk8bUYZFp7T32sd1 iaPo83t7JxvcV5l/q0WI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:86d6:0:b0:2bc:c89e:d8df with SMTP id n22-20020a2e86d6000000b002bcc89ed8dfmr6633059ljj.48.1696578644749; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:50:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFkXB3h18zhtmCVKbIk3peeumU1AHnAZEM72WxlNT9GKre9YH17YtoQnJzVKkyfrbo18IIZjpguBFLhc/qm3TI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:86d6:0:b0:2bc:c89e:d8df with SMTP id n22-20020a2e86d6000000b002bcc89ed8dfmr6633047ljj.48.1696578644435; Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:50:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230925151027.558546-1-sivaprasad.tummala@amd.com> In-Reply-To: <20230925151027.558546-1-sivaprasad.tummala@amd.com> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 09:50:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] config/x86: config support for AMD EPYC processors To: Sivaprasad Tummala Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru, dev@dpdk.org, dpdk-techboard , Thomas Monjalon X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 5:11=E2=80=AFPM Sivaprasad Tummala wrote: > > From: Sivaprasad Tummala > > By default, max lcores are limited to 128 for x86 platforms. > On AMD EPYC processors, this limit needs to be increased to > leverage all the cores. > > The patch adjusts the limit specifically for native compilation > on AMD EPYC CPUs. > > Signed-off-by: Sivaprasad Tummala This patch is a revamp of http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/BY5PR12MB3681C3FC6676BC03F0B42CCC96789@BY5PR12MB3= 681.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/ for which a discussion at techboard is supposed to have taken place. But I didn't find a trace of it. One option that had been discussed in the previous thread was to increase the max number of cores for x86. I am unclear if this option has been properly evaluated/debatted. Can the topic be brought again at techboard? Thanks. --=20 David Marchand