From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AB1B231E
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 17:47:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2017 08:47:29 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,390,1496127600"; d="scan'208";a="1153889943"
Received: from smonroyx-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.5])
([10.237.221.5])
by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2017 08:47:28 -0700
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
References: <20170721091119.15701-1-sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
<1688226.sl7kgNVU6i@xps> <d0b81ffa-e75c-7b51-17da-27b04b949536@intel.com>
<7842270.506WcGqqe5@xps>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, nic@opencloud.tech
From: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
Message-ID: <aa55e544-46b8-bc65-0c68-2bff62baa9c9@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:27 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7842270.506WcGqqe5@xps>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pci: limit default numa node to used devices
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:47:30 -0000
On 21/07/2017 16:37, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 21/07/2017 18:03, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy:
>> On 21/07/2017 15:53, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> The title and the text below should explain that you move
>>> the warning log from scan to probe, thanks to a temporary
>>> negative value.
>> I thought that saying that I only check for devices managed by dpdk
>> explains the purpose,
>> and the patch itself shows the change from one file to another.
> It is obvious when you look carefully at the code, yes.
> I was just giving my help to better explain :)
Just giving my view of the commit message
If you think it can be improve,by all meansfeel free to change it :)
>>> 21/07/2017 12:11, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy:
>>>> Commit 8a04cb612589 ("pci: set default numa node for broken systems")
>>>> added logic to default to NUMA node 0 when sysfs numa_node information
>>>> was wrong or not available.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately there are many devices with wrong NUMA node information
>>>> that DPDK does not care about but still show warnings for them.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, only check for invalid NUMA node information for devices
>>>> managed by the DPDK.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
>>> [...]
>>>> - if (eal_parse_sysfs_value(filename, &tmp) == 0 &&
>>>> - tmp < RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES)
>>>> + if (eal_parse_sysfs_value(filename, &tmp) == 0)
>>>> dev->device.numa_node = tmp;
>>> Why are you removing the check of the value?
>>> Are you going to accept invalid high values?
>>> This check was introduced on purpose by this commit:
>>> http://dpdk.org/commit/8a04cb6125
>> tmp is unsigned long type, so -1 is going to be a large number.
> Oh yes, I missed it was unsigned!
>
>> My understanding was that it was basically checking for -1 as numa_node.
>>
>> If we have valid numa_node greater than RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES, defaulting
>> to 0 is not a good idea, is it?
>>
>> What I try to achieve with the patch is:
>> - if no numa_node avilable then parse is going to fail and we set -1.
>> - if numa_node is present but wrong, my understanding was that it would
>> be -1.
> All your explanations make sense when you realize that it is unsigned.
>
> I have one more question,
> Does it work to check for a negative value like this?
> if (dev->device.numa_node < 0)
numa_node is signed int type in struct rte_device, so it should work.
Regards,
Sergio