From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re:
	=?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiBbUEFUQ0hdIGNvbmZpZzogc3VwcG9ydCAx?=
	=?utf-8?q?6_sockets_server?=
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:01:13 +0200
Message-ID: <5999666.82pXL9opv5@xps>
References: <453363AE6316CC428D594009B784F9050336F47C@SZXEMI508-MBS.china.huawei.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAEA920@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "Zhang,
 Jerry" <jerry.zhang@intel.com>, wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com>,
 "zhangsha (A)" <zhangsha.zhang@huawei.com>,
 "Lilijun (Jerry)" <jerry.lilijun@huawei.com>,
 Zhoujingbin <zhoujingbin@huawei.com>
To: caihe <caihe@huawei.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDAD17C9A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:01:16 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAEA920@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.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>

19/04/2017 11:49, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> 
> > 
> > We has already test on 16 node server, everything is fine, without any issue.
> > 
> > Testcase as follows:
> >   I. with dpdk args -c 0xf, test pass
> >  II. with 32 forward-lcores, each node with 2 lcores(total 16 nodes), test pass
> > III. with forward lcore id greater than 128, test pass
> >  IV. with forward and master lcore on node 15, test pass
> > 
> 
> That's really great to hear, but why default config have to be updated?
> Most people don't run dpdk on such powerful boxes, so for them
> increasing these config values would be just waste of space.
> Why not create your own config instead? 

I agree.
The default config should not set the maximum values
for the biggest machines.

Rejected