2016-03-08 17:04, Yuanhan Liu: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 10:49:30AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > On 03/07/2016 03:13 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > > >To me, maybe you could base the SINGLE_FILE_SEGMENTS option, and add > > >another option, say --no-sort (I confess this name sucks, but you get > > >my point). With that, we could make sure to create as least huge page > > >files as possible, to fit your case. > > > > Note that SINGLE_FILE_SEGMENTS is a nasty hack that only the IVSHMEM config > > uses, getting rid of it (by replacing with a runtime switch) would be great. > > Can't agree more.
+1 > BTW, FYI, Jianfeng and I had a private talk, and we came to agree that > it might be better to handle it outside the normal huge page init stage, > just like this patch does, but adding the support of multiple huge page > sizes. Let's not add more messy code there. > > --yliu > > > OTOH IVSHMEM itself seems to have fallen out of the fashion since the memnic > > driver is unmaintained and broken since dpdk 2.0... CC'ing the IVSHMEM > > maintainer in case he has thoughts on this. The ivshmem config was not used for memnic which was using ivshmem only for data path. CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IVSHMEM and CONFIG_RTE_EAL_SINGLE_FILE_SEGMENTS are more about full memory sharing. I have the feeling it could be dropped. It there are some users, I'd like to see a justification and a rework to remove these build options.
