RE: [PATCH] net/iavf:fix slow memory allocation

["You, KaisenX" <kaisenx.you@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> Sent: 2022年12月20日 18:33
> To: You, KaisenX <kaisenx.you@intel.com>
> Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Burakov, Anatoly
> <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org; Yang, Qiming
> <qiming.yang@intel.com>; Zhou, YidingX <yidingx.zhou@intel.com>; Wu,
> Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Zhang,
> Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>; Mcnamara,
> John <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/iavf:fix slow memory allocation
> 
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:12 AM You, KaisenX <kaisenx.you@intel.com>
> wrote:
> > > I tried to play a bit with a E810 nic on a dual numa and I can't see
> > > anything wrong for now.
> > > Can you provide a simple and small reproducer of your issue?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > This is my environment:
> > Enter "lscpu" on the command line:
> > NUMA:
> >         NUMA node(s): 2
> >         NUMA node0 CPU(S) : 0-27,56-83
> >         NUMA node1 CPU(S) : 28-55,84-111
> >
> > List the steps to reproduce the issue:
> >
> > 1. create vf and blind to dpdk
> > echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:ca\:00.0/sriov_ numvfs
> > ./usertools/dpdk-devbind. py -b vfio-pci 0000:ca:01.0 2. launch
> > testpmd ./x86_ 64-native-linuxapp-clang/app/dpdk-testpmd -l 28-48 -n 4
> > -a 0000:ca:01.0 --file-prefix=dpdk_ 525342_ 20221104042659 -- -i
> > --rxq=256 --txq=256
> > --total-num-mbufs=500000
> >
> > Parameter Description:
> >  "-l 28-48":The range of parameter values after "-l" must be on "NUMA
> node1 CPU(S)"
> >  "0000:ca:01.0":inset on node1
> 
> - Using 256 queues is not supported upstream...
> iavf_dev_configure(): large VF is not supported
> 
> I would really love that Intel stops building/testing features with this out of
> tree driver........
> We have lost and still lose so much time because of it.
> 
> 
> - Back to your topic.
> Can you try this simple hack:
> 
> diff --git a/lib/eal/common/eal_common_thread.c
> b/lib/eal/common/eal_common_thread.c
> index c5d8b4327d..92160c7fa6 100644
> --- a/lib/eal/common/eal_common_thread.c
> +++ b/lib/eal/common/eal_common_thread.c
> @@ -253,6 +253,7 @@ static void *ctrl_thread_init(void *arg)
>         void *routine_arg = params->arg;
> 
>         __rte_thread_init(rte_lcore_id(), cpuset);
> +       RTE_PER_LCORE(_socket_id) = SOCKET_ID_ANY;
>         params->ret = pthread_setaffinity_np(pthread_self(), sizeof(*cpuset),
>                 cpuset);
>         if (params->ret != 0) {
> 
Thanks for your advice.

But this issue still exists after I tried.
> 
> --
> David Marchand