[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC] eal: change default per socket memory allocation
Venkatesan, Venky
venky.venkatesan at intel.com
Fri May 2 11:05:02 CEST 2014
Agree with Anatoly - I would much rather not change legacy option behaviour that has existed for a while, especially when --socket-mem is available to do exactly what is needed.
-Venky
-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Burakov, Anatoly
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 1:54 AM
To: Burakov, Anatoly; David Marchand; dev at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC] eal: change default per socket memory allocation
Hi again David/Didier,
> Can I suggest to do an RTE_MAX between (internal_config.memory -
> total_mem) and (internal_config.memory * cpu_per_socket[socket_id] +
> rte_lcore_count() - 1) / rte_lcore_count() ? I don't think it's a good
> idea to go over the requested amount. Let the last core have a chance
> of reserving slightly less memory than other cores, but don't let it
> go over the limit. If specific memory constraints are required, let
> the user use --socket-mem instead.
Sorry for spamming, but now that I think of it, I don't believe this change makes much sense. If the user wants memory on specific sockets, there's already --socket-mem option. If the user doesn't care, there's -m option, which gives the user memory from whatever sockets it is available. With this change applied, DPDK will fail when run with -m switch under certain circumstances (e.g. cores from socket 0 present in the coremask but no memory left on socket 0), which is quite the opposite of a simple "give me n megs, I don't care where it comes from" option -m is providing.
Best regards,
Anatoly Burakov
DPDK SW Engineer
--------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Shannon Limited
Registered in Ireland
Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare Registered Number: 308263 Business address: Dromore House, East Park, Shannon, Co. Clare
More information about the dev
mailing list