From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com (mail-pa0-f46.google.com [209.85.220.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E21D0282 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 17:34:00 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id lf10so246701pab.19 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:34:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=37M/lJBHQVyB5Le5V/SdPAwOSoVdU9/idI4Oe+5kzd8=; b=Wu6S4f5YAhnMOCirHJUBTbmLgwcyfntpZWo4FMTz5T14+3O3o1GdAu/X9qLqjVZpx0 zBfGKExGOYbKA7H+lHjrzY+luUfsgoM7QSlC3+pL/zj/MPEWU4WSDnymPPFNskyS68dF hiPFp+bThesf/W6RdgcXBrSgzbiPEOoERMVt9cWNeOuR/Aa8id8kjh3jrPZGWRWGNyxY ZFekhv4WtGbP2VSItoWyciR10dKmMsonwPvtg/VNcs8hi2fBXLquTHOYy7hH8gMpXOCf wjKc2cxpcA5qOothmtdSHRLdXWHuV0Km/GYqVxjIwaWACcKh+NXllkJCswK/p9cGoGfM n8Uw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmDXJHSwpy1FE2BOgAl+nAgL6ssmrf1CtRtqDxOqBMba4/4sMNoW7rupxuP+sqWT//ewOZo MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.70.126.161 with SMTP id mz1mr32568593pdb.14.1418142839955; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:33:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.30.4 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 08:33:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:33:59 -0600 Message-ID: From: Matt Laswell To: "dev@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-dev] A question about hugepage initialization time X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:34:01 -0000 Hey Folks, Our DPDK application deals with very large in memory data structures, and can potentially use tens or even hundreds of gigabytes of hugepage memory. During the course of development, we've noticed that as the number of huge pages increases, the memory initialization time during EAL init gets to be quite long, lasting several minutes at present. The growth in init time doesn't appear to be linear, which is concerning. This is a minor inconvenience for us and our customers, as memory initialization makes our boot times a lot longer than it would otherwise be. Also, my experience has been that really long operations often are hiding errors - what you think is merely a slow operation is actually a timeout of some sort, often due to misconfiguration. This leads to two questions: 1. Does the long initialization time suggest that there's an error happening under the covers? 2. If not, is there any simple way that we can shorten memory initialization time? Thanks in advance for your insights. -- Matt Laswell laswell@infiniteio.com infinite io, inc.