On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:05:01 +0200
David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 9:40 PM Stephen Hemminger
> <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> > +struct lcore_config {
> > + pthread_t thread_id; /**< pthread identifier */
> > + int pipe_master2slave[2]; /**< communication pipe with master */
> > + int pipe_slave2master[2]; /**< communication pipe with master */
> > +
> > + lcore_function_t * volatile f; /**< function to call */
> > + void * volatile arg; /**< argument of function */
> > + volatile int ret; /**< return value of function */
> > +
> > + uint32_t core_id; /**< core number on socket for this
> > lcore */
> > + uint32_t core_index; /**< relative index, starting from 0 */
> > + uint16_t socket_id; /**< physical socket id for this lcore */
> > + uint8_t core_role; /**< role of core eg: OFF, RTE, SERVICE
> > */
> > + uint8_t detected; /**< true if lcore was detected */
> > + volatile enum rte_lcore_state_t state; /**< lcore state */
> > + rte_cpuset_t cpuset; /**< cpu set which the lcore affinity to
> > */
> > +};
>
> There are still changes on the core_id, core_index, socket_id that I
> am not confortable with (at this point).
>
> I prepared a series for -rc1 on ABI changes in EAL (that I will send shortly).
> I took your patch without the changes on core_id, core_index and socket_id.
Why, please be more precise.
Do you expect to support more than 32 bit worth of cores?
