From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Marchand Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Provide reasonable default to -n Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:03:47 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Panu Matilainen Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com (mail-ob0-f177.google.com [209.85.214.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E26592B for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:03:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: by obbda8 with SMTP id da8so63174835obb.1 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 05:03:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hello, On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote: > The number of memory channels is a truly obscure thing as a mandatory > command line argument when its really just an optimization. > Provide a reasonable default in mempool as suggested by Bruce Richardson > and make the -n argument optional in EAL to make DPDK that little bit > easier to use for a first-timer. > > Panu Matilainen (2): > mempool: use a better default for number of memory channels > eal: make the -n argument optional > > lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 8 +------- > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > Looks good to me. Thanks Panu. Acked-by: David Marchand -- David Marchand