From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] Balanced allocation of hugepages
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 13:14:03 +0100
Message-ID: <20170608121403.GA59132@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1496736832-835-1-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <CGME20170606133348eucas1p1cc5c3c05f88b2101c2ea47b26e0cac24@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
 <1496756020-4579-1-git-send-email-i.maximets@samsung.com>
 <6eb536e9-9071-f08e-e819-a41c6f78cda3@samsung.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>,
 Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 Heetae Ahn <heetae82.ahn@samsung.com>, Yuanhan Liu <yliu@fridaylinux.org>,
 Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
 Yulong Pei <yulong.pei@intel.com>
To: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@samsung.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A942BA1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Jun 2017 14:14:08 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6eb536e9-9071-f08e-e819-a41c6f78cda3@samsung.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 02:21:58PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I just want to clarify current status of these patches.
> As I understand, moving to the new build system (for example,
> meson+ninja as proposed[1] by Bruce) is a very long process.
> But we have issues with imbalanced memory allocation now, and
> IMHO it's better to fix them in a near future.
> 
> Latest version (v5) of balanced allocation patches adds linbuma
> as general unconditional dependency which conflicts with the
> current DPDK policies.
> 
> So, there are 2 option:
> 
> 	1. Return back config option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
> 	   from the first version of the patch and disable it by default.
> 
> 	2. Keep patch as it is now and make everyone install libnuma
> 	   for successful build.
> 
> I have no preferences about above options. I'm asking your opinions.
> 
> Bruce, Sergio, Thomas, what do you think?
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-June/067428.html
> 
> Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
>
I would be ok with having libnuma as a dependency, so I think I'd prefer
option 2 to 1, assuming libnuma is available in all major Linux distros.

/Bruce