From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 483F9B368
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 22:24:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19])
 by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2014 13:26:23 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,774,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="463727037"
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([134.134.172.151])
 by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2014 13:26:22 -0700
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:25:06 -0700
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Message-ID: <20140731202506.GC28495@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1406665466-29654-1-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
 <20140730210920.GB6420@localhost.localdomain>
 <20140731131351.GA20718@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <5766264.li3nkTmgY6@xps13>
 <20140731143228.GB20718@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20140731181032.GC20718@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20140731183631.GC6420@localhost.localdomain>
 <20140731201018.GE20718@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140731201018.GE20718@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Organization: Intel Shannon Limited. Registered in Ireland.  Registered
 Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare. Registered
 Number: 308263. Business address: Dromore House, East Park, Shannon, Co.
 Clare.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] dpdk: Allow for dynamic enablement of
 some isolated features
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 20:24:23 -0000

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 04:10:18PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:36:32AM -0700, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 02:10:32PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:32:28AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 03:26:45PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > > 2014-07-31 09:13, Neil Horman:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 02:09:20PM -0700, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 03:28:44PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59:03AM -0700, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 04:24:24PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hey all-
> > 
> > With regards to the general approach for runtime detection of software
> > functions, I wonder if something like this can be handled by the
> > packaging system? Is it possible to ship out a set of shared libs
> > compiled up for different instruction sets, and then at rpm install
> > time, symlink the appropriate library? This would push the whole issue
> > of detection of code paths outside of code, work across all our
> > libraries and ensure each user got the best performance they could get
> > form a binary?
> > Has something like this been done before? The building of all the
> > libraries could be scripted easy enough, just do multiple builds using
> > different EXTRA_CFLAGS each time, and move and rename the .so's after
> > each run.
> > 
> 
> Sorry, I missed this in my last reply.
> 
> In answer to your question, the short version is that such a thing is roughly
> possible from a packaging standpoint, but completely unworkable from a
> distribution standpoint.  We could certainly build the dpdk multiple times and
> rename all the shared objects to some variant name representative of the
> optimzations we build in for certain cpu flags, but then we woudl be shipping X
> versions of the dpdk, and any appilcation (say OVS that made use of the dpdk
> would need to provide a version linked against each variant to be useful when
> making a product, and each end user would need to manually select (or run a
> script to select) which variant is most optimized for the system at hand.  Its
> just not a reasonable way to package a library.

Sorry, perhaps I was not clear, having the user have to select the
appropriate library was not what I was suggesting. Instead, I was
suggesting that the rpm install "librte_pmd_ixgbe.so.generic",
"librte_pmd_ixgbe.so.sse42" and "librte_pmd_ixgbe.so.avx". Then the rpm
post-install script would look at the cpuflags in cpuinfo and then
symlink librte_pmd_ixgbe.so to the best-match version. That way the user
only has to link against "librte_pmd_ixgbe.so" and depending on the
system its run on, the loader will automatically resolve the symbols
from the appropriate instruction-set specific .so file.

> 
> When pacaging software, the only consideration given to code variance at pacakge
> time is architecture (x86/x86_64/ppc/s390/etc).  If you install a package for
> your a given architecture, its expected to run on that architecture.  Optional
> code paths are just that, optional, and executed based on run time tests.  Its a
> requirement that we build for the lowest common demoniator system that is
> supported, and enable accelerative code paths optionally at run time when the
> cpu indicates support for them.
> 
> Neil
>