> -----Original Message-----
> From: oulijun <ouli...@huawei.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:22 PM
> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> ferruh.yi...@intel.com
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; linux...@openeuler.org; nd <n...@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2 1/4] config/arm: add Hisilicon
> kunpeng920 implementer
>
>
>
> 在 2021/3/23 23:40, Ruifeng Wang 写道:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: oulijun <ouli...@huawei.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 9:52 PM
> >> To: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; tho...@monjalon.net;
> >> ferruh.yi...@intel.com
> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; linux...@openeuler.org; nd <n...@arm.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2 1/4] config/arm: add Hisilicon
> >> kunpeng920 implementer
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2021/3/23 16:07, Ruifeng Wang д :
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Lijun Ou
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 9:36 AM
> >>>> To: tho...@monjalon.net; ferruh.yi...@intel.com
> >>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; linux...@openeuler.org
> >>>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2 1/4] config/arm: add Hisilicon
> >>>> kunpeng920 implementer
> >>>>
> >>>> Here addes Kunpeng920 config back which was deleted.
There was no Kunpeng920 specific config before change 91c730fd4e09.
It would fall back to generic build because the behavior was to do generic
build for unknown implementor / part number.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: 91c730fd4e09 ("config/arm: remove unused or superfluous
> >>>> variables")
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengch...@huawei.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <ouli...@huawei.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> V1->V2:
> >>>> - rewrite patch title.
> >>>> - split the patch into two.
> >>>> ---
> >>>> config/arm/meson.build | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/config/arm/meson.build b/config/arm/meson.build index
> >>>> 00bc461..3826900 100644
> >>>> --- a/config/arm/meson.build
> >>>> +++ b/config/arm/meson.build
> >>>> @@ -133,6 +133,25 @@ implementer_cavium = {
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> +implementer_hisilicon = {
> >>>> + 'description': 'Hisilicon',
> >>>> + 'flags': [
> >>>> + ['RTE_USE_C11_MEM_MODEL', true],
> >>>> + ['RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE', 128],
> >>>
> >>> Just want to double check.
> >>> One Kunpeng920 box I can access have cache line size 64B.
> >>>
> >> I have a question, which level does RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE refer to? For
> >> kunpeng920, L1/L2 cache size is 64B L3 is 128B
> >
> > Got it.
> > I think RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE is not defined for a certain level of cache.
> > Data can be prefetched into any level of cache by using different APIs.
> >
> So our current configuration should be fine.
Agree.
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>> + ['RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES', 4]
> >>>> + ],
> >>>> + 'part_number_config': {
> >>>> + '0xd01': {
> >>>> + 'machine_args': ['-march=armv8.2-a+crypto',
> >>>> + '-mtune=tsv110'],
> >>>> + 'flag': [['RTE_MACHINE', '"kunpeng920"'],
> >>>> + ['RTE_MAX_LCORE', 128],
> >>>> + ['RTE_ARM_FEATURE_ATOMICS', true]
> >>>> + ]
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> implementer_ampere = {
> >>>> 'description': 'Ampere Computing',
> >>>> 'flags': [
> >>>> @@ -190,6 +209,7 @@ implementers = {
> >>>> 'generic': implementer_generic,
> >>>> '0x41': implementer_arm,
> >>>> '0x43': implementer_cavium,
> >>>> + '0x48': implementer_hisilicon,
> >>>> '0x50': implementer_ampere,
> >>>> '0x51': implementer_qualcomm,
> >>>> '0x56': implementer_marvell,
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.7.4
> >>>
> >>> .
> >>>
