On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 5:00 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > >>> The name of the option should not include "huge". > > >>> What about "--worker-stack" ? > > >>> If disabled (equal zero), the workers should use the default stack > > >>> memory. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> Wouldn't that have the potential to create confusion? The point of this > > >> change is to allocate worker stacks from hugepages. Removing huge > > >> from the option name could give the impression that the command is > > >> simply to control worker stack size. > > > It means if we control the worker stack size with a DPDK option, > > > DPDK memory will be used. > > > But we cannot force hugepage with this option. > > > Hugepage is not always available and it can be disabled in DPDK. > > > > The command could be rejected if hugepages are not available. > > That's not in the patch currently, but can be added. > > David, Anatoly, Dmitry, what do you think?
We have other non compatible EAL options for which combining them trigger an init failure. This is acceptable for me. -- David Marchand
