From: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
To: Ruslan Bilovol <rbilovol@cisco.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Is contiguous hugepages memory still required in latest DPDKs?
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:41:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <61219f8c-972d-3e18-6e75-57207d7e149c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a774c72-bd59-ea52-b65f-ed8cb0b8a700@cisco.com>
The DPDK will still try to allocate contiguous hugepages.
Since DPDK v16.07 the mempool library is able to create a mempool with
multiple chunks of memory.
You would still have the contig memory restriction for any other DPDK
library or app.
Are you pre-allocating hugepages on boot (kernel cmdline) or runtime?
Sergio
On 21/03/2017 14:20, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently after moving to 4.4 Linux kernel we found that DPDK v16.07
> can't find physically contiguous chunk of hugepages memory.
>
> I've tracked this down to kernel commits
> 81c0a2bb515f ("mm: page_alloc: fair zone allocator policy")
> fff4068cba48 ("mm: page_alloc: revert NUMA aspect of fair allocation
> policy")
> 4ffeaf3560a5 ("mm: page_alloc: reduce cost of the fair zone
> allocation policy")
>
> These commits changed default page allocator behavior so it now allocates
> memory proportionally from preferred and lower zones. Hugepages
> are scattered proportionally among few memory zones, so possibility
> to find big physically contiguous chunk of hugepages memory is much
> lower.
>
> I see that there were some attempts to move from contiguous hugepages
> approach, like http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-March/035201.html
> Also some discussion here:
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/2016-October/001050.html
>
> The question: is contiguous hugepages memory still required in latest
> DPDKs,
> and if not, since which version?
>
> Thanks,
> Ruslan
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-21 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-21 14:20 Ruslan Bilovol
2017-03-21 14:41 ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy [this message]
2017-03-22 12:08 ` Ruslan Bilovol
2017-03-23 16:24 ` Ruslan Bilovol
2017-03-23 16:49 ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=61219f8c-972d-3e18-6e75-57207d7e149c@intel.com \
--to=sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=rbilovol@cisco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).