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 3C2C1A0550; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:47:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3FA11606DA; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:46:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 620A340690 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:46:58 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: 6bwQI/q4anuzf6N86SGmOk4c9BwYG/Jvjn594JeVqsyBz5lIxt3Nopb+TbxUH0bdJ4ZCyVoHIz 1bIXfJI2bmNA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9896"; a="182075149" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,183,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="182075149" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Feb 2021 02:46:56 -0800 IronPort-SDR: qHTqnlGjZ5Z2GJ/SjawHLbahMhnXmKXB6+4SP0lKn1dvCTgoqBrh3xJYcth8/A4DZApVp4zMcl hduc9yBdZANQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,183,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="512472362" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.4.41]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 16 Feb 2021 02:46:55 -0800 Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 10:46:52 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20210216104652.GB136@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20210216094300.27889-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <313c223f-bf1c-9307-75f8-0a0c1da7fd21@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <313c223f-bf1c-9307-75f8-0a0c1da7fd21@intel.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: support using 0 as coremask for no-affinitization 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 Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 10:36:13AM +0000, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 16-Feb-21 9:43 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > Allow the user to specify that they don't want any core pinning from DPDK > > by passing in the coremask of 0. > > --- > > I haven't checked what happens yet, but down the line we also set affinity > for service cores as well as interrupt thread. what would be the semantics > of those in this particular case? do we want the same ability for service > cores (i.e. pick a non-affinitized core)? And where does interrupt thread > affinitize in this case (presumably, nowhere too)? > I have not checked the service core setup, because a) I forgot about them and b) I'm not sure how their affinity rules work with respect to the main lcore mask. On the other hand I did check out that the lcore mask for all non-pinned threads, or control threads, is the full set of bits as expected. /Bruce