From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f46.google.com (mail-qg0-f46.google.com [209.85.192.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 299102A66 for ; Fri, 4 Sep 2015 19:29:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by qgt47 with SMTP id 47so21381615qgt.2 for ; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:29:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=IGuB+BZv/05IwMYdarUDowMSmea6TeD5s2Cu3quxErI=; b=IbjotnqpkpGNRVneIbN9CmCVGSHtK/Kf79rzjnbFgrTYEbSQvbukuFy+UXxHj0XUqr zHyNevzVqYY3NeUWcZ9IyDpT2qhcod3x45+RPwkxe8YX4CTaNmQaWYJpG4x2GwWcSq5P pQZUCexOawCvTj4cmJk/ckKQlaOLaZ32vv/2lKH59oUGBYqBQz6deEwirSOXlDlGL9FL s/eCtB4UYhwC96DbJDgBLI56hrtxZL4MOsM6XFJ5SgmoI8q2X9fJ0oEg1z8MnjNxaMka t8yr5vCKVPNY0AeeZ/T3pGwgSYXM2mAQdjRA4vjQX1nwJUCwnwrKMgQ5bNM9uQ4a35en 25zg== X-Received: by 10.140.102.193 with SMTP id w59mr6712420qge.93.1441387776600; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:29:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.55.25.149 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Sep 2015 10:29:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Rajesh R Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 22:59:17 +0530 Message-ID: To: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] how to change binding of NIC ports to NUMA nodes 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: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 17:29:37 -0000 Hi Pablo, Thank you for the reply. I think I did not convey my query properly in my question. I agree that physical placement of NICs in PCIe slots decides the NUMA node to which it is associated. But in the server that I am experimenting(IBM system x 3850 x5 with 4 xeon 7560 processors) there are two IO hubs though which the PCIe slots are connected to the CPU sockets. 4 of the PCIe slots are connected to 1 IOH and 3 slots are connected to the second IOH. Each IOH is connected to 2 cpu sockets- IOH1 is connected to sockets (0 and 1) . IOH2 is connected to sockets (2 and 3). When I put 2 NICs in slots connecting to IOH1, both get binded to socket 0. Similarly when I put 2 NICs in slots connecting to IOH2, both get binded to socket 2. My question is why none of the cards get binded to numa nodes(sockets) 1 or 3? Is there something that I am missing in the physical architecture of the server? is it that each IOH is directly connected to only 1 socket? Regards Rajesh On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:50 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo < pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com> wrote: > Hi Rajesh, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Rajesh R > > Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 5:29 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] how to change binding of NIC ports to NUMA nodes > > > > Hi, > > > > I am trying an application based on dpdk on a 4- processor server i.e. 4 > > numa nodes. > > The server is having with 4 NIC cards out of which 2 cards get binded to > > numa node 0 and other 2 cards get binded to numa node 2 (as per the > > /sys/pci/.../numa_node for each card) > > > > > > How to evenly distribute the cards to all the numa nodes so that one card > > each gets binded to one numa node? > > > > Can we control the binding from dpdk, either pmd_ixgbe or igb_uio? > > The drivers cannot change the numa node where your NICs are, > as those nodes are associated to the different physical sockets (CPU and > memory) > that you have on your platform, and your NICs are connected physically > to these sockets via the PCI slots. > > So, if you want to change the numa node, you will have to move the NIC(s) > to another PCI slot that is connected to a different socket. > Look at the user guide of your platform to find out which PCI slots are > connected to which socket. > > Regards, > > Pablo > > > > > > -- > > Regards > > > > Rajesh R > -- Regards Rajesh R