patches for DPDK stable branches
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Song, Keesang" <Keesang.Song@amd.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"aconole@redhat.com" <aconole@redhat.com>,
	 "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	"bluca@debian.org" <bluca@debian.org>,
	"ktraynor@redhat.com" <ktraynor@redhat.com>,
	"bruce.richardson@intel.com" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com" <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	"drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>,
	"Grimm, Jon" <Jon.Grimm@amd.com>,
	"Hollingsworth, Brent" <brent.hollingsworth@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Extend --lcores to run on cores > RTE_MAX_LCORE
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 08:19:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BYAPR12MB3607ED35C4D85F1F6AF2A83B96120@BYAPR12MB3607.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5572457.lOV4Wx5bFT@xps>

[AMD Official Use Only - Internal Distribution Only]

Thanks Thomas for bringing this up.
I consider this is not a new feature, but rather a fix to address the issue with statically assigned maximum lcore limit on high-density CPU platform such as AMD Epyc.
As I see a lot of DPDK adopters are still using LTS 18.11 & 19.11, and they have 1~2 yrs of lifetime left, we like to backport this to LTS 18.11 & 19.11 at least.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 12:04 AM
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; aconole@redhat.com; ferruh.yigit@intel.com; Song, Keesang <Keesang.Song@amd.com>; bluca@debian.org; ktraynor@redhat.com; bruce.richardson@intel.com; honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com; drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com; stable@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Extend --lcores to run on cores > RTE_MAX_LCORE

[CAUTION: External Email]

Hi,

21/01/2020 01:24, Thomas Monjalon:
> 02/12/2019 16:35, David Marchand:
> > We are currently stuck with no option but recompile a DPDK if the 
> > system has more cores than RTE_MAX_LCORE.
> > A bit of a pity when you get a system with more than 200+ cores and 
> > your testpmd has been built and packaged with RTE_MAX_LCORE == 128.
> >
> > The --lcores does not need to care about the underlying cores, 
> > remove this limitation.
>
> > David Marchand (4):
> >   eal/windows: fix cpuset macro name
> >   eal: do not cache lcore detection state
> >   eal: display all detected cores at startup
> >   eal: remove limitation on cpuset with --lcores
>
> The patches look good but it is very hard to review parsing code (last patch).
> We will better experience corner cases after merging.
>
> Applied for -rc1, thanks

This patch was merged in 20.02.
We don't have any feedback about issues so it's probably working fine.

It is solving a problem for running DPDK on machines having a lot of cores.
Now the difficult question: is it a new feature or a fix?
Should we backport this patchset?


  reply	other threads:[~2020-02-21 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20191202153559.9709-1-david.marchand@redhat.com>
2019-12-02 15:41 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 1/4] eal/windows: fix cpuset macro name David Marchand
     [not found] ` <2076701.vBoWY3egPC@xps>
2020-02-21  8:04   ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Extend --lcores to run on cores > RTE_MAX_LCORE Thomas Monjalon
2020-02-21  8:19     ` Song, Keesang [this message]
2020-02-21  9:40       ` David Marchand
2020-02-21 14:48         ` Aaron Conole
2020-02-21 16:38           ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-05-29  3:05     ` Song, Keesang
2020-05-29  3:05       ` Song, Keesang
2020-06-01 21:22         ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-06-01 22:54           ` Song, Keesang
2020-06-09 16:30             ` Song, Keesang
2020-06-09 17:48               ` Luca Boccassi
2020-06-09 21:34                 ` Kevin Traynor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=BYAPR12MB3607ED35C4D85F1F6AF2A83B96120@BYAPR12MB3607.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=keesang.song@amd.com \
    --cc=Jon.Grimm@amd.com \
    --cc=aconole@redhat.com \
    --cc=bluca@debian.org \
    --cc=brent.hollingsworth@amd.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=ktraynor@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).