[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[David Marchand]

Following "options parsing" patchset (commit d7cb626f and 489a9d6c), core
detection is not working correctly on bsd.

./x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc/app/test -c f -n 4 -- -i
[...]
EAL: lcore 0 unavailable
EAL: invalid coremask

Align bsd to linux:
- commit f563a372 "eal: fix recording of detected/enabled logical cores"
- commit 4f04db8b "eal: check coremask against detected lcores"

Reported-by: Zhan, Zhaochen <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c       |    6 +++---
 lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_lcore.c |   15 +++++++++------
 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
index c40a59a..ca99cb9 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal.c
@@ -517,6 +517,9 @@ rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv)
 	if (rte_eal_log_early_init() < 0)
 		rte_panic("Cannot init early logs\n");
 
+	if (rte_eal_cpu_init() < 0)
+		rte_panic("Cannot detect lcores\n");
+
 	fctret = eal_parse_args(argc, argv);
 	if (fctret < 0)
 		exit(1);
@@ -551,9 +554,6 @@ rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv)
 
 	rte_config_init();
 
-	if (rte_eal_cpu_init() < 0)
-		rte_panic("Cannot detect lcores\n");
-
 	if (rte_eal_memory_init() < 0)
 		rte_panic("Cannot init memory\n");
 
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_lcore.c b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_lcore.c
index 43a5c01..5b52eba 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_lcore.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/eal_lcore.c
@@ -71,16 +71,18 @@ rte_eal_cpu_init(void)
 	unsigned count = 0;
 
 	const unsigned ncpus = get_ncpus();
-
-	/* disable lcores that were not detected */
-	RTE_LCORE_FOREACH(lcore_id) {
-
+	/*
+	 * Parse the maximum set of logical cores, detect the subset of running
+	 * ones and enable them by default.
+	 */
+	for (lcore_id = 0; lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE; lcore_id++) {
 		lcore_config[lcore_id].detected = (lcore_id < ncpus);
 		if (lcore_config[lcore_id].detected == 0) {
 			config->lcore_role[lcore_id] = ROLE_OFF;
 			continue;
 		}
-		count++;
+		/* By default, each detected core is enabled */
+		config->lcore_role[lcore_id] = ROLE_RTE;
 		lcore_config[lcore_id].core_id = cpu_core_id(lcore_id);
 		lcore_config[lcore_id].socket_id = cpu_socket_id(lcore_id);
 		if (lcore_config[lcore_id].socket_id >= RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES)
@@ -93,8 +95,9 @@ rte_eal_cpu_init(void)
 #endif
 		RTE_LOG(DEBUG, EAL, "Detected lcore %u\n",
 				lcore_id);
+		count ++;
 	}
-
+	/* Set the count of enabled logical cores of the EAL configuration */
 	config->lcore_count = count;
 	RTE_LOG(DEBUG, EAL, "Support maximum %u logical core(s) by configuration.\n",
 		RTE_MAX_LCORE);
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:43:31AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> Following "options parsing" patchset (commit d7cb626f and 489a9d6c), core
> detection is not working correctly on bsd.
> 
> ./x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc/app/test -c f -n 4 -- -i
> [...]
> EAL: lcore 0 unavailable
> EAL: invalid coremask
> 
> Align bsd to linux:
> - commit f563a372 "eal: fix recording of detected/enabled logical cores"
> - commit 4f04db8b "eal: check coremask against detected lcores"
> 
> Reported-by: Zhan, Zhaochen <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>

Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>

 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[Zhan, Zhaochen]

> > Following "options parsing" patchset (commit d7cb626f and 489a9d6c), core
> > detection is not working correctly on bsd.
> >
> > ./x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc/app/test -c f -n 4 -- -i
> > [...]
> > EAL: lcore 0 unavailable
> > EAL: invalid coremask
> >
> > Align bsd to linux:
> > - commit f563a372 "eal: fix recording of detected/enabled logical cores"
> > - commit 4f04db8b "eal: check coremask against detected lcores"
> >
> > Reported-by: Zhan, Zhaochen <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>

Tested-by: Zhaochen Zhan <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>

This patch has been verified on FreeBSD 10.0.
DPDK base commit: 3043ce5011aa7075b32c80c79b9db96199938602
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v2 @ 2.80GHz
GCC: gcc48 (FreeBSD Ports Collection) 4.8.3
 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[Thomas Monjalon]

> > > Following "options parsing" patchset (commit d7cb626f and 489a9d6c), core
> > > detection is not working correctly on bsd.
> > >
> > > ./x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc/app/test -c f -n 4 -- -i
> > > [...]
> > > EAL: lcore 0 unavailable
> > > EAL: invalid coremask
> > >
> > > Align bsd to linux:
> > > - commit f563a372 "eal: fix recording of detected/enabled logical cores"
> > > - commit 4f04db8b "eal: check coremask against detected lcores"
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Zhan, Zhaochen <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
> > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Zhaochen Zhan <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>

Applied

Thanks
-- 
Thomas

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[Neil Horman]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:43:31AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> Following "options parsing" patchset (commit d7cb626f and 489a9d6c), core
> detection is not working correctly on bsd.
> 
> ./x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc/app/test -c f -n 4 -- -i
> [...]
> EAL: lcore 0 unavailable
> EAL: invalid coremask
> 
> Align bsd to linux:
> - commit f563a372 "eal: fix recording of detected/enabled logical cores"
> - commit 4f04db8b "eal: check coremask against detected lcores"
> 
> Reported-by: Zhan, Zhaochen <zhaochen.zhan@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>

Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>

Though, that said, why are these files diverged in the first place?  At least as
far as eal_lcore.c and eal.c are concerned the only differences appear to be
cases of one file being updated and not the other.  It seems that, rather than
doing a patch like this to bring bsd up to date with linux, we should just
de-dup the files, put them in a common location and handle any real behavioral
differences with macros/ifdefs.  Is there a reason for separating them?

Neil

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[David Marchand]

Hello Neil,

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
>
> Though, that said, why are these files diverged in the first place?  At
> least as
> far as eal_lcore.c and eal.c are concerned the only differences appear to
> be
> cases of one file being updated and not the other.  It seems that, rather
> than
> doing a patch like this to bring bsd up to date with linux, we should just
> de-dup the files, put them in a common location and handle any real
> behavioral
> differences with macros/ifdefs.  Is there a reason for separating them?
>

I agree that there should only be one file for those things (and a lot of
other stuff like eal_debug, eal_log etc...).
This is not that easy: I tried once and gave up because the resulting
patchset was huge.
Personally, I don't have time to dig into this.


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/bsd: fix core detection

[Neil Horman]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 01:23:49PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> Hello Neil,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> >
> > Though, that said, why are these files diverged in the first place?  At
> > least as
> > far as eal_lcore.c and eal.c are concerned the only differences appear to
> > be
> > cases of one file being updated and not the other.  It seems that, rather
> > than
> > doing a patch like this to bring bsd up to date with linux, we should just
> > de-dup the files, put them in a common location and handle any real
> > behavioral
> > differences with macros/ifdefs.  Is there a reason for separating them?
> >
> 
> I agree that there should only be one file for those things (and a lot of
> other stuff like eal_debug, eal_log etc...).
> This is not that easy: I tried once and gave up because the resulting
> patchset was huge.
> Personally, I don't have time to dig into this.
> 
No one ever does, thats how messes like this happen :)

I've got a bsd guest installed, I'll see if I can clean it up.
Neil

> 
> -- 
> David Marchand