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 4876CA0548; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 09:57:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A4F41180; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 09:57:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtpservice.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com [62.23.145.78]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B3440DFD; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 09:57:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from 6wind.com (unknown [10.16.18.213]) by smtpservice.6wind.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439426001B; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 09:57:28 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 09:57:28 +0100 From: Olivier Matz To: David Marchand Cc: Houssem Bouhlel , dev , dpdk stable , Thomas Monjalon , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Burakov, Anatoly" , Bruce Richardson Message-ID: References: <20211026090610.10823-1-houssem.bouhlel@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: fix selection of default device NUMA node 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 Sender: "dev" On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 09:36:49PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:45 AM Olivier Matz wrote: > > > > +CC David > > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 11:17:08AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 11:06:10AM +0200, Houssem Bouhlel wrote: > > > > There can be dev binding issue when no hugepages > > > > are allocated for socket 0. > > > > To avoid this, set device numa node value based on > > > > the first lcore instead of 0. > > > > > > > > Fixes: 831dba47bd36 ("bus/vmbus: add Hyper-V virtual bus support") > > > > > > Sorry, the Fixes line is wrong. This is the correct one: > > > Fixes: 8a04cb612589 ("pci: set default numa node for broken systems") > > > > > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Houssem Bouhlel > > > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz > > > > --- > > > > drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c | 4 +++- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c b/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c > > > > index f8fff2c98ebf..c70ab2373c79 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c > > > > @@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ rte_pci_probe_one_driver(struct rte_pci_driver *dr, > > > > struct rte_pci_device *dev) > > > > { > > > > int ret; > > > > + unsigned int socket_id; > > > > bool already_probed; > > > > struct rte_pci_addr *loc; > > > > > > > > @@ -194,7 +195,8 @@ rte_pci_probe_one_driver(struct rte_pci_driver *dr, > > > > if (rte_socket_count() > 1) > > > > RTE_LOG(INFO, EAL, "Device %s is not NUMA-aware, defaulting socket to 0\n", > > > > dev->name); > > > > > > One more comment (sorry, I should have done it before you send the mail): > > > We should move this log below, and use the socket_id instead of 0. > > > > > > > - dev->device.numa_node = 0; > > > > + socket_id = rte_lcore_to_socket_id(rte_get_next_lcore(-1, 0, 0)); > > > > + dev->device.numa_node = socket_id; > > > > After some offline discussions with David, some additional comments: > > > > - a similar change may be needed in other bus drivers > > > > - instead of setting the numa node to an existing socket, it can make > > more sense to keep its value to unknown (-1). This would however be a > > behavior change for pci bus, which returns 0 since 2015 for unknown > > cases. See: > > 81f8d2317df2 ("eal/linux: fix socket value for undetermined numa node") > > 8a04cb612589 ("pci: set default numa node for broken systems") > > > > I'll tend to be in favor of using -1. Any other opinion? > > Should we announce a behavior change in this case? > > Good summary. > I copied some more people. > > I am for -1 too (as a way to indicate "I don't know what this PCI > device affinity is"). > > It is dangerous to change now, and I think it is late for 21.11. +1, we can make an announce and change this for next version.