DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	Dharmik Thakkar <Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com>
Cc: "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 14:58:58 +0000
Message-ID: <f0eddd84dd6e422a9152c38116132a4b@pantheon.tech> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12050806.9cV25Y2rms@thomas>

I believe we're going to drop this patch series in favor of http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=12923. 

> -----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 [this message]
2020-10-13 15:14                     ` Dharmik Thakkar
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=f0eddd84dd6e422a9152c38116132a4b@pantheon.tech \
    --to=juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech \
    --cc=Dharmik.Thakkar@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
    --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