From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 129F81B1EE for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 12:43:54 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Nov 2018 03:43:54 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,282,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="252666871" Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.82.86]) ([10.251.82.86]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 Nov 2018 03:43:52 -0800 To: Asaf Sinai , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <2b09cec8-0883-2ed2-0264-aeef871ea6a9@intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <518f9333-8d80-0fa2-d391-b4c8df181508@intel.com> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:43:52 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] CONFIG_RTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES: no difference in memory pool allocations, when enabling/disabling this configuration X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 11:43:55 -0000 On 26-Nov-18 11:33 AM, Asaf Sinai wrote: > Hi Anatoly, > > We did not check it with "testpmd", only with our application. > From the beginning, we did not enable this configuration (look at attached files), and everything works fine. > Of course we rebuild DPDK, when we change configuration. > Please note that we use DPDK 17.11.3, maybe this is why it works fine? Just tested with DPDK 17.11, and yes, it does work the way you are describing. This is not intended behavior. I will look into it. -- Thanks, Anatoly