From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76DFB695D for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:49:55 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=intel; t=1490287795; x=1521823795; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LxeNa7ydljGUyrdKIYW7wNfVzCXPgrqfIXjrQb9iHzM=; b=C4kJVXX+126zJeb40BvWx6rNU0Q3fBlf68dtLoX1jOGSFdAthK/hKdzq kEU2lxwSaNZl70RVqOJ6C2iHSsv9rA==; Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Mar 2017 09:49:54 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,210,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="78661245" Received: from smonroyx-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.23]) ([10.237.221.23]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2017 09:49:53 -0700 To: Ruslan Bilovol , dev@dpdk.org References: <4a774c72-bd59-ea52-b65f-ed8cb0b8a700@cisco.com> <61219f8c-972d-3e18-6e75-57207d7e149c@intel.com> From: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:49:52 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Is contiguous hugepages memory still required in latest DPDKs? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:49:55 -0000 On 23/03/2017 16:24, Ruslan Bilovol wrote: > On 03/22/2017 02:08 PM, Ruslan Bilovol wrote: >> On 03/21/2017 04:41 PM, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy wrote: >>> 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. > > Another question: are there any improvements in contiguous hugepages > requirements in latest DPDK (v17.02)? > Not that I can think of. Sergio > Thanks, > Ruslan > > >>> >>> Are you pre-allocating hugepages on boot (kernel cmdline) or runtime? >> I tried both cases, and there is no much difference between them. >> (I used debug prints in kernel to see physical address of >> preallocated hugepages >> >> Main issue is that linux kernel memory allocation algorithm was changed >> with "fair zone allocator policy" commits, and in my case need to >> pre-allocate 2x or even 3x more hugepages now. >> >> Regards, >> Ruslan >> >>> >>> 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 >>>> >>> >> >