Re: [PATCH v3] examples/l3fwd: dynamic NUMA-aware alloc lcore_conf

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

31/10/2026 02:37, fengchengwen:
> On 10/30/2026 8:59 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 30/10/2026 11:52, Konstantin Ananyev:
> >>> BTW: SOCKET_ID_ANY seemed need redefined as RTE_SOCKET_ID_ANY, If there is no
> >>>       objection, I will make the changes in the next independent patch.
> >>
> >> Yep, that's probably a good thing to do, and probably 26.11 is a good 
> >> time to do that.
> >> BTW, I think it was discussed before, but I can't remember why we didn't 
> >> fix it so far.
> > 
> > 1/ We should not break this API easily as it is used a lot.
> > If we do the change we need to keep the compat alias for some time.
> > 
> > 2/ The term SOCKET is used in many places instead of NUMA.
> > There is a confusion between CPU and memory which deserves to be fixed.
> > 
> 
> My plan is a 3-patch series:
> 1. Add RTE_SOCKET_ID_ANY and deprecation documentation.
> 2. Replace all in-tree SOCKET_ID_ANY with RTE_SOCKET_ID_ANY.
> 3. Mark SOCKET_ID_ANY with RTE_DEPRECATED after in-tree migration completes,
>    so warnings only hit out-of-tree users while DPDK itself builds cleanly.
> 
> I will avoid the bigger "socket -> NUMA node" terminology refactor in this series.
> That would be a massive semantic change with large churn, better handled via separate
> RFC later.
> 
> If this plan looks acceptable, I will start the implementation.

My doubt is that while introducing a new API,
it may be better to apply it in correct places with correct definition,
avoiding mixing CPU and memory.