Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] Balanced allocation of hugepages

[Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>]

-----Original Message-----
> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:58:50 +0100
> From: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com>
> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, Ilya Maximets
>  <i.maximets@samsung.com>
> CC: dev@dpdk.org, Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, Bruce Richardson
>  <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>,
>  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>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] Balanced allocation of hugepages
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
>  Thunderbird/45.1.1
> 
> On 20/06/2017 15:35, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 20/06/2017 15:58, Ilya Maximets:
> > > On 20.06.2017 16:07, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > 19/06/2017 13:10, Hemant Agrawal:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 02:21:58PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 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.
> > > > > +1 for option 1
> > > > > It will be a issue and undesired dependency for SoCs, not supporting
> > > > > NUMA architecture.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It can be added to the config, who desired to use it by default.
> > > > Yes I agree, it cannot be a dependency for architectures which
> > > > do not support NUMA.
> > > > Please can we rework the patch so that only one node is assumed
> > > > if NUMA is disabled for the architecture?
> 
> Ilya, I missed that libnuma is not supported on ARM.

It is supported on arm64 and arm64 has NUMA machines(thunderx, thunderx2) too.

[dpdk.org] $ dpkg-query -L libnuma-dev
/.
/usr
/usr/lib
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libnuma.a
/usr/share
/usr/share/man
/usr/share/man/man3
/usr/share/man/man3/numa.3.gz
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/libnuma-dev
/usr/share/doc/libnuma-dev/copyright
/usr/include
/usr/include/numaif.h
/usr/include/numa.h
/usr/include/numacompat1.h
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libnuma.so


> 
> > > We're still don't have dynamic build time configuration system.
> > > To make get/set_mempolicy work we need to include <numaif.h>
> > > and have libnuma for successful linkage.
> > > This means that the only option to not have libnuma as dependency
> > > is to return back configuration option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
> > > as it was in the first version of the patch.
> > > 
> > > There is, actually, the third option (besides 2 already described):
> > > 
> > > 	3. Return back config option RTE_LIBRTE_EAL_NUMA_AWARE_HUGEPAGES
> > > 	   from the first version of the patch and *enable* it by default.
> > > 	   In this case anyone who doesn't want to have libnuma as dependency
> > > 	   will be able to disable the config option manually.
> > > 
> > > Thomas, what do you think? Bruce? Sergio?
> > It should be enabled on x86 and ppc, and disabled in other
> > default configurations (ARM for now).
> 
> Agree.
> 
> > > P.S. We're always able to implement syscall wrappers by hands without any
> > >       external dependencies, but I don't think it's a good decision.
> > I agree to use libnuma instead of re-inventing the wheel.
> > Let's just make it optional at build time and fallback on one node
> > if disabled.
> 
> That is the simple way out.
> 
> Sergio