From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB7C1A0A0F;
	Sun,  4 Jul 2021 10:27:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366A840040;
	Sun,  4 Jul 2021 10:27:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from shelob.oktetlabs.ru (shelob.oktetlabs.ru [91.220.146.113])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B35C14003F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun,  4 Jul 2021 10:27:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.38.17] (aros.oktetlabs.ru [192.168.38.17])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by shelob.oktetlabs.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0B8B7F4FD;
 Sun,  4 Jul 2021 11:27:11 +0300 (MSK)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 shelob.oktetlabs.ru D0B8B7F4FD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=oktetlabs.ru;
 s=default; t=1625387231;
 bh=oM1yYbfNDrdn7iF4CJ9janriDtb86RrekzyPNAWMu/A=;
 h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To;
 b=Ukh7cEywlpgCdqLdjuNHPsPyHYGQ+Ar0Pkha52SPeMLNeBPbw85pAQGlkW4/5dHbC
 lnzsl2tcA/pLGyiAfm2+N7fat8ykTzyp7rPAt9WQtl+ZwdqbC73nHVj7S82e7xVE4f
 HZZRPZNE7xWkTpPx+r8rzXgn671mGbBIHQHUNBH4=
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: ferruh.yigit@intel.com, keesang.song@amd.com, anatoly.burakov@intel.com,
 david.marchand@redhat.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com,
 David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com,
 ruifeng.wang@arm.com
References: <2863796.yO5TXMfXnl@thomas> <12700395.j6fn4b5UDm@thomas>
From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Organization: OKTET Labs
Message-ID: <9e359fe9-f993-ef6c-1b51-1e08fec5ff9b@oktetlabs.ru>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2021 11:27:11 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <12700395.j6fn4b5UDm@thomas>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] NUMA node/socket
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 7/4/21 4:53 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 04/07/2021 03:38, Thomas Monjalon:
>> There are some mix between NUMA node and socket IDs in DPDK.
>> Examples:
>> 	* rte_eth_dev_socket_id() returns the NUMA node.
>> 	* rte_malloc use sockets to allocate the memory
>>
>> Is it critical?
> 
> There is a function, implemented for Windows only,
> which distinguishes clearly node and socket
> but it assumes there is only 1 node per socket:
> 
> unsigned int
> eal_socket_numa_node(unsigned int socket_id)
> {
>     return cpu_map.sockets[socket_id].node_id;
> }
> 
> Reminder: AMD can be configured to have multiple nodes per socket.

Taking the reminder into account the topic definitely
requires improvements.

I apologize for my ignorance, but
Is socket ID really interesting to anybody in DPDK?
If no, we should just clarify terminology and switch
to NUMA node everywhere.