On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 4:41 PM Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> wrote: > > When no hugepages are found, we log a message about it, but we never > specify on which node. We also implicitly declare the page size based > on the directory name, but that's not very user friendly. > > Fix both by changing the text of the message to note the NUMA node (if > applicable) and explicitly mention page size in kilobytes.
Not sure it is worth aligning but another log uses bytes. >From my tests (after unmounting 2M hugetlbfs mountpoint): EAL: 512 hugepages of size 2097152 reserved, but no mounted hugetlbfs found for that size > > Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> The rest lgtm. Reviewed-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> -- David Marchand
