DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>
To: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
Cc: "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] build: find max lcore programmatically
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 15:14:39 +0000
Message-ID: <A0607156-3D1E-4D94-9239-8E71215D6164@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f0eddd84dd6e422a9152c38116132a4b@pantheon.tech>

Hi Juraj,

> On Oct 13, 2020, at 9:58 AM, Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
> 
> I believe we're going to drop this patch series in favor of http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=12923.

I can see you have included this feature in your series. Thank you!
What are your thoughts on the other patch [1]? Do you plan on including that as well in your series?

[1] 	[1/2] config/arm: avoid variable reuse
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/75946/

> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 4:32 PM
>> To: Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>
>> Cc: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>; dev@dpdk.org; Stephen
>> Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Jerin Jacob
>> <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>; nd <nd@arm.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] build: find max lcore programmatically
>> 
>> Please, what is the conclusion here?
>> 
>> 
>> 18/09/2020 07:47, Dharmik Thakkar:
>>> 
>>>> On Sep 17, 2020, at 4:56 AM, Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 7:44 AM
>>>>> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>>>>> Cc: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>; Jerin Jacob
>>>>> <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>; thomas@monjalon.net; dpdk-dev
>>>>> <dev@dpdk.org>; nd <nd@arm.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] build: find max lcore
>>>>> programmatically
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 3, 2020, at 5:52 PM, Stephen Hemminger
>>>>> <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 06:20:17 +0000
>>>>>> Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Dharmik Thakkar
>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 6:56 AM
>>>>>>>> To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> Cc: thomas@monjalon.net; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; nd
>>>>>>>> <nd@arm.com>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] build: find max lcore
>>>>>>>> programmatically
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 11:47 PM, Jerin Jacob
>>>>>>>>> <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 2:44 AM Dharmik Thakkar
>>>>>>>> <dharmik.thakkar@arm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> For Arm, RTE_MAX_LCORE is hard-coded into the config. It leads
>>>>>>>>>> to incorrect RTE_MAX_LCORE when machines have same
>> Implemener
>>>>>>>>>> and part number but different number of CPUs.
>>>>>>>>>> For x86, RTE_MAX_LCORE is always set to 128 (using the value
>>>>>>>>>> set in
>>>>>>>>>> meson_options.txt)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Use python script to find max lcore when using native build to
>>>>>>>>>> correctly set RTE_MAX_LCORE.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We may need to build on the native arm64 machine and use it on
>>>>>>>>> another
>>>>>>>>> arm64 machine(Just like x86).
>>>>>>>>> So I think, at least for default config(which will be used by
>>>>>>>>> distribution) to support max
>>>>>>>>> lcores as fixed. I am not sure this patch changes those aspects
>>>>>>>>> or not? Please check.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This patch does *not* affect ‘default’ build type and cross-compilation.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thakkar@arm.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> config/get_max_lcores.py | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>> config/meson.build       | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode
>>>>>>>>>> 100755 config/get_max_lcores.py
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/config/get_max_lcores.py
>>>>>>>>>> b/config/get_max_lcores.py new file mode 100755 index
>>>>>>>>>> 000000000000..ebf1c7efdadd
>>>>>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/config/get_max_lcores.py
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>>>>>>>>>> +#!/usr/bin/python3
>>>>>>>>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause # Copyright(c) 2020
>>>>>>>>>> +Arm Limited
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> +import os
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> +max_lcores = []
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> +nCPU = os.cpu_count()
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> +max_lcores.append(str(nCPU & 0xFFF))             # Number of CPUs
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> +print(' '.join(max_lcores))
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/config/meson.build b/config/meson.build index
>>>>>>>>>> 6996e5cbeaa5..80c05bc15d2f 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/config/meson.build
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/config/meson.build
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -237,11 +237,22 @@ else # for 32-bit we need smaller
>>>>>>>>>> reserved memory
>>>>>>>> areas
>>>>>>>>>>     dpdk_conf.set('RTE_MAX_MEM_MB', 2048) endif
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>> compile_time_cpuflags = []
>>>>>>>>>> subdir(arch_subdir)
>>>>>>>>>> dpdk_conf.set('RTE_COMPILE_TIME_CPUFLAGS',
>>>>>>>>>> ','.join(compile_time_cpuflags))
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> +# set max lcores
>>>>>>>>>> +if machine != 'default' and not meson.is_cross_build()
>>>>>>>>>> +       # The script returns max lcores
>>>>>>>>>> +       params = files('get_max_lcores.py')
>>>>>>>>>> +       cmd_out = run_command(params)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Have you considered running just a shell command, such as "nproc --all"?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Is this really a good idea?
>>>>>> For real distributions and NFV products, the build and runtime
>>>>>> environment will usually be different even if on same CPU architecture.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In many cases there maybe a huge build machine (128 CPU) or in a
>>>>>> container (reported as single cpu) even if not doing cross build.
>>>>> 
>>>>> That’s a great point, Stephen. IMO, this patch is useful when
>>>>> building and running natively.
>>>>> For all other purposes (like the ones you mentioned), do you think
>>>>> it is a good idea to set RTE_MAX_LCORE using -Dmax_lcores?
>>>> 
>>>> We should only use this native builds, as that would be consistent with the
>> current meson build philosophy of "meson figuring as much as possible on its
>> own". Any build other than native implies the user wants to deviate from the
>> build machine.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The MIDR value-based probing doesn’t quite work well for Arm IP (currently
>> being discussed on this patch: https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/76981/).
>>> 
>>>> One way to do this automatic core count is when max_lcores=0 (0 would
>> have the special meaning of "figure core count automatically"). We can set that
>> as default in meson_option.txt and then users will have the ability to set it to
>> whatever they want, even for native builds. What do you think?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, agreed.
>>> 
>>>> Currently the -Dmax_lcores option doesn't work for arm builds (the value of
>> RTE_MAX_LCORE is overwritten in config/arm/meson.build). I believe the patch
>> tries to address this, but still, we need to be mindful of that.
>>>> 
>>>> Juraj
>> 
>> 
> 


  reply index

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-25 21:13 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: avoid variable reuse Dharmik Thakkar
2020-08-25 21:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] build: find max lcore programmatically Dharmik Thakkar
2020-08-26  4:47   ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-26  4:55     ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-09-03  6:20       ` Juraj Linkeš
2020-09-03 22:52         ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-09-04  5:43           ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-09-17  9:56             ` Juraj Linkeš
2020-09-18  5:47               ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-10-13 14:31                 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-10-13 14:58                   ` Juraj Linkeš
2020-10-13 15:14                     ` Dharmik Thakkar [this message]
2020-10-14  6:53                       ` Juraj Linkeš
2020-10-14 13:28                         ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-09-04  5:26         ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-09-17  9:33 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] config/arm: avoid variable reuse Juraj Linkeš
2020-09-18  5:26   ` Dharmik Thakkar
2020-09-18  8:40     ` Juraj Linkeš

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=A0607156-3D1E-4D94-9239-8E71215D6164@arm.com \
    --to=dharmik.thakkar@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
    --cc=juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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

DPDK patches and discussions

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox