From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDAD17C9A for ; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7127220980; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:01:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:01:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=aoXz8x+d2pdPDEu coTngXCubhEmy2nKNbecG0b0uV0w=; b=pO8uaa6fdUCkZbI3uQ/i14rSWpeUvUi hTIAxP5m0zEclBJ7J0oij6wVkCLijz8QVTh3R/vcWBJHv85W+Sd7P6MtPfBHtelw z3K/iMcKtEUHCyFVaHu1PNaWhQnbyuGvKYuOjnyL8fFi1hC1qLS9Sp6suzCPr/Ny aLaaCS4Y8fAQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=aoXz8x+d2pdPDEucoTngXCubhEmy2nKNbecG0b0uV0w=; b=faOnDel6 2NYP6UHYj0SLYg1o8SrmZJs2pb8h7W1p1AN0/IKiC8uHHBs+5DRX9LOUfW4sp8PM 2q+b7rRTj/nzwqNSlHGk4qdAH0LnoUvtP/AfwWviE9JyZtSshdhe6WdpFOZJRa01 Hj+fVOfNzABwFb95XEGzRVBslSpc2HLfFHM/I7FARy6TNF/CcVjQJPHoAq7Qiszw nLnG21za0xR+jHU29mryo/LjqeQ79ayPPD/twenqvuqlmoRWywLlw0hUtx6Y527L tB8rbwFJfEsk4aRMX5XjlIf2eUv/jfFYfxjLr/eaP6Amke6KzDDyB++uMXMhT3CK 3bA2hR7ds0gUXw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 1oGcz95nI4Q/W12UjqWfk3A/MShPAJDlWk8wJ+y1MPnl 1493586076 Received: from xps.localnet (245.114.118.80.rev.sfr.net [80.118.114.245]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 02BA1245D2; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:01:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: caihe Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Zhang, Jerry" , wangyunjian , "zhangsha (A)" , "Lilijun (Jerry)" , Zhoujingbin Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:01:13 +0200 Message-ID: <5999666.82pXL9opv5@xps> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAEA920@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <453363AE6316CC428D594009B784F9050336F47C@SZXEMI508-MBS.china.huawei.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAEA920@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiBbUEFUQ0hdIGNvbmZpZzogc3VwcG9ydCAx?= =?utf-8?q?6_sockets_server?= 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: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 21:01:17 -0000 19/04/2017 11:49, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > > We has already test on 16 node server, everything is fine, without any issue. > > > > Testcase as follows: > > I. with dpdk args -c 0xf, test pass > > II. with 32 forward-lcores, each node with 2 lcores(total 16 nodes), test pass > > III. with forward lcore id greater than 128, test pass > > IV. with forward and master lcore on node 15, test pass > > > > That's really great to hear, but why default config have to be updated? > Most people don't run dpdk on such powerful boxes, so for them > increasing these config values would be just waste of space. > Why not create your own config instead? I agree. The default config should not set the maximum values for the biggest machines. Rejected