From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f47.google.com (mail-pg0-f47.google.com [74.125.83.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46BF3DC for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 06:24:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m9so13250878pgd.3 for ; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 21:24:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FtyaQ9ZvwvdCq5hJDz3taJOixHXy4O/kHZ9SNwWjMvY=; b=YJMmO2SnS4Y5E9EJitUziV8K96ww/n0eKnPUSi77oz4f/flEdroAeao0lLlpQUfHwS PVy1ccUD85ZhmOl4PBxvIkVmsOUu8/4Dc+5TeSY++tlL88Q2BvxZGnLM/KpXeAyJ5Aes R3+0AX2zKATHKTd54zPQeQIRwIEHRLMjTmNEqPaVsiHI+p3UqLEbkonCyDxw8PdDYbX7 tHuDiXrCymohuSPovlEonrkKIT3HWuwvadTwgh6bZvHHZZ7tNM4KxNVKedqE9ny3NAAF duzOTDcGJ8Bfo6ynznkTEgGYRAUZsXaBvn+NZNyBYQdnH5s4C+xNQ4dVVO/fnmWhqOoD 9ASA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FtyaQ9ZvwvdCq5hJDz3taJOixHXy4O/kHZ9SNwWjMvY=; b=IG1bZipcvqhfTlifswqFNI8N/1FgFQx2U5ff28VmSIEW/HZGNkux4/4dorTy5MP5+l +HltDJGqYVHdhzbXf3WpoSK5fSI74STWeh6BHQ1B+SyF7QeEyday7Z35WlNGl4awTGmp dGsej5Y8k5imnjWRnmXd1w+gNTW2iDJ56RZfa/SR/HE5pDawY25tTkaAVNbw0GK09hxu w/ohIR3JhYnbFAn/jiBeEKZRJTyLZpnfBx/ZHNAi4mKKHWaIVn2ZishtD0r+MXDaSsiQ In1l05UDhK/suwOjtkCQEZ2TWP1OfuU5kgm0SRGWXl7seiWgQ/daHe5fi5gCosT5Mjlt U1FA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjB1j2wZ2f6nxKY3t73IfOXH/ZxTUyRGCcbtCYFaAGGed84puum WG/8JEZm1eNvxIzn+IePUikHhGEVI7gM X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb6bRLw9Br0wxzuyFS94L3vJspjO0Bz5g6mD3VhoyaaSU+acHbUk8CHXcISAJ+rD9cLDSNzYhQgOr6ic3frmge4= X-Received: by 10.84.209.134 with SMTP id y6mr6782976plh.339.1504671847736; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 21:24:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.181.236 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 21:24:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.181.236 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Sep 2017 21:24:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6DAF063A35010343823807B082E5681F1A72FDB1@mbx05.360buyAD.local> References: <6DAF063A35010343823807B082E5681F1A72FDB1@mbx05.360buyAD.local> From: Stephen Hemminger Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 21:24:06 -0700 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?546L5b+X5YWL?= Cc: dev@dpdk.org, users@dpdk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] long initialization of rte_eal_hugepage_init 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 04:24:09 -0000 Linux zeros huge pages by default. There was a fix in later releases On Sep 5, 2017 8:24 PM, "=E7=8E=8B=E5=BF=97=E5=85=8B" wr= ote: > Hi All, > > I observed that rte_eal_hugepage_init() will take quite long time if ther= e > are lots of huge pages. Example I have 500 1G huge pages, and it takes > about 2 minutes. That is too long especially for application restart case= . > > If the application only needs limited huge page while the host have lots > of huge pages, the algorithm is not so efficent. Example, we only need 1G > memory from each socket. > > What is the proposal from DPDK community? Any solution? > > Note I tried version dpdk 16.11. > > Br, > Wang Zhike >