From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E001B20A for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 17:10:48 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2019 08:10:47 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,454,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="124366060" Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.137]) ([10.237.220.137]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2019 08:10:46 -0800 To: chetan bhasin Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: <6982c4b0-6475-eca5-49f3-b27fe8364768@intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 16:10:45 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK 17.11.4 (Madvise)Transparent Huge pages 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: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 16:10:49 -0000 On 08-Jan-19 1:15 PM, chetan bhasin wrote: > Thanks Anatoly > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019, 16:01 Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > > On 02-Jan-19 3:31 PM, chetan bhasin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am using DPDK 17.11.4 version . Do anybody have idea that DPDK > is using > > benefit of Transparent huge-pages in case of Madvise. > > > > Thanks, > > Chetan Bhasin > > > > Hi, > > DPDK does not use MADVISE flags to allocate its hugepages - it > allocates > hugepages explicitly [1] [2]. > > [1] > http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c#n367 > [2] > http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c#n336 > > -- > Thanks, > Anatoly > Apologies, i didn't notice that the question was about 17.11, so the source code links are incorrect. However, the answer itself is still correct - we always did allocate hugepages directly, and we never used MADVISE flags. -- Thanks, Anatoly