On 19-Feb-20 4:20 PM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Hi Anatoly,
Yes we are facing an issue with our custom applications.
Earlier we have tried with l2fwd DPDK application and does not see any
issue with memory initialization.
Not sure whether we missed any other options.
BTW when we tried with l2fwd appli
Hi Anatoly,
Yes we are facing an issue with our custom applications.
Earlier we have tried with l2fwd DPDK application and does not see any
issue with memory initialization.
Not sure whether we missed any other options.
BTW when we tried with l2fwd application, the application does not seem to
ha
On 19-Feb-20 3:42 PM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Hi Anatoly,
Thanks for the suggestions. Yeah we have just changed in our application
to invoke mlockall() before rte_eal_init(). Looks like it does not help
either.
if (mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE)) {
printf("Failed mlockall !!
Hi Anatoly,
Thanks for the suggestions. Yeah we have just changed in our application to
invoke mlockall() before rte_eal_init(). Looks like it does not help
either.
if (mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE)) {
printf("Failed mlockall !! **\n");
}
ret = rte_eal_init(argc, ar
On 19-Feb-20 3:02 PM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions. We didnt have --mlockall parameter option in
the rte_eal_init().
we have just tried the option and our application says an *unrecognized
option*.
Lets us check further on this and let you know.
Thanks,
Kamaraj
No, that's not
Thanks for the suggestions. We didnt have --mlockall parameter option in
the rte_eal_init().
we have just tried the option and our application says an *unrecognized
option*.
Lets us check further on this and let you know.
Thanks,
Kamaraj
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 7:53 PM Burakov, Anatoly
wrote:
>
On 19-Feb-20 11:16 AM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Hi Kevin/Anatoly,
Yes we have the patch already included in our code base.
Looks like it get struck in the below piece of the code:
mapped_addr = mmap(requested_addr, (size_t)map_sz, PROT_READ,
mmap_flags, -1, 0);
Could y
Hi Kevin/Anatoly,
Yes we have the patch already included in our code base.
Looks like it get struck in the below piece of the code:
mapped_addr = mmap(requested_addr, (size_t)map_sz, PROT_READ,
mmap_flags, -1, 0);
Could you please share your thoughts on this?
Tha
On 19/02/2020 10:23, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> On 17-Feb-20 9:57 AM, Kamaraj P wrote:
>> Hi Anatoly,
>> Thanks for the clarifications.
>>
>> Currently we are migrating to the new DPDK 18.11 ( from 17.05). Here is
>> our configuration:
>> ===
On 17-Feb-20 9:57 AM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Hi Anatoly,
Thanks for the clarifications.
Currently we are migrating to the new DPDK 18.11 ( from 17.05). Here is
our configuration:
===
We have configured the "--legacy-mem" option and
Hi Anatoly,
Thanks for the clarifications.
Currently we are migrating to the new DPDK 18.11 ( from 17.05). Here is
our configuration:
===
We have configured the "--legacy-mem" option and changed the
CONFIG_RTE_MAX_MEM_MB to 2048
On 07-Dec-19 5:01 PM, Kamaraj P wrote:
Hello All,
Currently, we are facing an issue with memory allocation failure
in memseg_primary_init().
When we configure the CONFIG_RTE_MAX_MEM_MB to 512MB and correspondingly
configured the number of huge pages for our platform. But the virtual
memory alloc
Hello All,
Currently, we are facing an issue with memory allocation failure
in memseg_primary_init().
When we configure the CONFIG_RTE_MAX_MEM_MB to 512MB and correspondingly
configured the number of huge pages for our platform. But the virtual
memory allocation is failing.
It appears that its tr
13 matches
Mail list logo
