<snip>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> > 07/08/2019 14:00, David Marchand:
> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 12:26 PM Gagandeep Singh <g.si...@nxp.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > DPDK currently is supporting maximum 3 hugepage, sizes whereas
> > > > system can support more than this e.g.
> > > > 64K, 2M, 32M and 1G.
> > >
> > > You can mention ARM platform here, and that this issue starts with
> > > kernel 5.2 (and I would try to mention this in the title as well).
> > > This is better than an annotation that will be lost.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Having these four hugepage sizes available to use by DPDK, which
> > > > is valid in case of '--in-memory' EAL option or using 4 separate
> > > > mount points for each hugepage size;
> > > > hugepage_info_init() API reports an error.
> > >
> > > Can you describe what is the impact from a user point of view rather
> > > than mentioning this internal function?
> >
> > Yes please, we need to understand how much it is critical.
>
> It is critical for stacks like VPP which uses by default in-memory.
> There stack would be broken on kernel 5.2 and above.
> I will change the description to make it clear.
>
> > Should we Cc sta...@dpdk.org for backport?
> yes
>
> > Should it be merged at the last minute in 19.08?
> If this is the only change, that we need to do (i.e. no dynamic allocation),
> then yes it can go.
Would it make sense to keep this change to Arm platforms only as other
platforms are not affected?
