On 1/17/2023 1:35 AM, Du, Frank wrote:
Moved down, please don't top post.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit, <ferruh.yi...@amd.com>
>> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023 9:15 PM
>> To: Du, Frank <frank...@intel.com>; Loftus, Ciara <ciara.lof...@intel.com>
>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/af_xdp: parse numa node id from sysfs
>>
>> On 12/12/2022 12:48 AM, Frank Du wrote:
>>> Get from /sys/class/net/{if}/device/numa_node.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Du <frank...@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
>>> b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
>>> index b6ec9bf490..38b9d36ab5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
>>> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
>>> #include <rte_power_intrinsics.h>
>>>
>>> #include "compat.h"
>>> +#include "eal_filesystem.h"
>>>
>>> #ifndef SO_PREFER_BUSY_POLL
>>> #define SO_PREFER_BUSY_POLL 69
>>> @@ -2038,9 +2039,6 @@ rte_pmd_af_xdp_probe(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (dev->device.numa_node == SOCKET_ID_ANY)
>>> - dev->device.numa_node = rte_socket_id();
>>> -
>>> if (parse_parameters(kvlist, if_name, &xsk_start_queue_idx,
>>> &xsk_queue_cnt, &shared_umem, prog_path,
>>> &busy_budget, &force_copy) < 0) { @@ -2053,6
>>> +2051,19 @@
>>> rte_pmd_af_xdp_probe(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + /* get numa node id from net sysfs */
>>> + if (dev->device.numa_node == SOCKET_ID_ANY) {
>>> + unsigned long numa = 0;
>>> + char numa_path[PATH_MAX];
>>> +
>>> + snprintf(numa_path, sizeof(numa_path),
>>> "/sys/class/net/%s/device/numa_node",
>>> + if_name);
>>> + if (eal_parse_sysfs_value(numa_path, &numa) != 0)
>>> + dev->device.numa_node = rte_socket_id();
>>> + else
>>> + dev->device.numa_node = numa;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> busy_budget = busy_budget == -1 ? ETH_AF_XDP_DFLT_BUSY_BUDGET :
>>> busy_budget;
>>>
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> It looks reasonable to set virtual DPDK af_xdp device socket to actual
>> underlying device socket. And as I checked quickly, it works as expected.
>>
>> But what is the impact and motivation of the patch? In other words why you
>> are doing this patch and what output you are expecting as a result?
>> Did you able to do any performance testing, and are you observing any
>> difference before and after this test?
>>
>
> Hi ferruh,
>
> Our application use rte_eth_dev_socket_id to query the socket that a NIC port
> connected, then allocate lcore/memory according to this affinity.
>
> The remote memory access is really slow compared to local.
>
As you observing any performance gain after change? If so, how much?
