From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D415A0524; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 17:00:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BFB1DB9E; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 17:00:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30B2A1DB83 for ; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 17:00:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1593874841; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Gnd0w5aq1iK+bPClOJdrPtVvlyKSPe10O9vGrknU1GU=; b=h1I3j90Nr1a34391aCw31rYhyLlePUB3ThwHlxRghQlSeZHutmojgz7FthVtHbqCX3+cEN lBSyxY4xi/YlXZtUi61s9B0BGBlC53M5UBonneI4ek6+Sm+zgG92a+DoKH34L0piFcBqZh +aB3nE/NMFg9use0zQLNs59avj2HJt0= Received: from mail-vs1-f70.google.com (mail-vs1-f70.google.com [209.85.217.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-438-8uB8pC1VPPCdan-Qs4RmzQ-1; Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:00:37 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 8uB8pC1VPPCdan-Qs4RmzQ-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f70.google.com with SMTP id s203so5967334vsc.8 for ; Sat, 04 Jul 2020 08:00:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Gnd0w5aq1iK+bPClOJdrPtVvlyKSPe10O9vGrknU1GU=; b=XdfvU3n4uSKSC2C2l+XMcl2C30w8iNJNStryRQ2IzfZuXcAawE+96Dl0lw3uY6UX0q 4A2ruf+jQaeRAgsv+DB6bWbF85do4J9dlXoEmfgu4ZLefkVEb7kYIqtn81Oz/aFpyDcs 9uYr4hz6Gx2sU067qKKSuZrbNcjYoUlI3Q0Qzzfhtu9hrDwQpLSyfdPtnvkrLfWgEHDk IVFG9kEMf9+ZusY/YB65XLHA7xiW2WQFTVOHcL0ryZ3A9lbU+zp4dTGHh6Jt5jl1XF8M Om+eLHK2rnw0JostdCLixVSJTINrz9K+oby7mxDZSqJx9k3j2sdHrOEtAeY4uQtFlAPr wOpw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530f2MHNvrQ2+kpCNlM4f2E6z33Bc3foZsHCxmOIhen3RxXJCVEn BIn9XSfDx/QwWDG2vrMhnukkoE3FiEZHZlPyE/A5GrzGLRce+9ycTZfZQHHGDIbXZym74h8+EAz vSxf5Xe8JrF1K2Uu4s98= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:6084:: with SMTP id u126mr28984319vkb.56.1593874836946; Sat, 04 Jul 2020 08:00:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwqdJ007ddQMeW2JRZquOHynUpdJma26reHGgO0SKjvYYffeY6ES1pGPptZUIhH3Ny2xYOxJlI69dybsZqqmKs= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:6084:: with SMTP id u126mr28984292vkb.56.1593874836674; Sat, 04 Jul 2020 08:00:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200610144506.30505-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <2939263.AvGHZF5Fiy@thomas> <2881429.9YLJUJncU7@thomas> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2020 17:00:25 +0200 Message-ID: To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Thomas Monjalon Cc: "Stokes, Ian" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "mdr@ashroe.eu" , "ktraynor@redhat.com" , "i.maximets@ovn.org" , "Mcnamara, John" , "Kovacevic, Marko" , "Burakov, Anatoly" , Olivier Matz , Andrew Rybchenko , Neil Horman Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/9] eal: register non-EAL threads as lcores X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 6:40 PM Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > what are the advantages of current approach (forbid MP support on the fly) > over explicit start-up parameters (either --proc-type=single or --lcore-allow=...)? > Why do you think it is a better one? I don't want to perpetuate the "please carefully set your command line" habit. This feature is added through a C API, with documentation and flagged as experimental, it should be enough. How about moving the mp disable in rte_thread_register() as a separate API? Then a developer must call rte_mp_disable() before attempting rte_thread_register(). That would be equivalent to --proc-type=single. Why not convert lcore-allow into an API? This would force us to put something in the init so that external users see how the application has been started and adjust the secondary commandline. On the other hand, rte_mp_disable() is easy to do with my current v4 + I am running out of time for rc1. We can still revisit this experimental API. -- David Marchand