[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 05/11] eal/mem: extract common code for dynamic memory allocation

[Dmitry Kozlyuk]

On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:21:06 +0100
"Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:

> On 25-May-20 1:37 AM, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote:
> > Code in Linux EAL that supports dynamic memory allocation (as opposed to
> > static allocation used by FreeBSD) is not OS-dependent and can be reused
> > by Windows EAL. Move such code to a file compiled only for the OS that
> > require it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk at gmail.com>
> > ---  
> 
> I believe you forgot to add dynmem to Makefile.

Right, thanks.

> 
> > +eal_dynmem_calc_num_pages_per_socket(
> > +	uint64_t *memory, struct hugepage_info *hp_info,
> > +	struct hugepage_info *hp_used, unsigned int num_hp_info)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int socket, j, i = 0;
> > +	unsigned int requested, available;
> > +	int total_num_pages = 0;
> > +	uint64_t remaining_mem, cur_mem;
> > +	uint64_t total_mem = internal_config.memory;
> > +
> > +	if (num_hp_info == 0)
> > +		return -1;
> > +
> > +	/* if specific memory amounts per socket weren't requested */
> > +	if (internal_config.force_sockets == 0) {
> > +		size_t total_size;
> > +		int cpu_per_socket[RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES];
> > +		size_t default_size;
> > +		unsigned int lcore_id;  
> 
> Comparing code from eal_memory.c and this one, it seems like you've 
> dropped all 32-bit code from this function. Is that intentional?

No, it's a mistake.

-- 
Dmitry Kozlyuk