On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:08:44AM +0000, Varghese, Vipin wrote: > [Public] > > Snipped > > > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution > > when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding. > > > > > > 27/05/2025 17:29, Bruce Richardson: > > > This patchset performs some basic cleanup of EAL lcore arguments > > > before any more serious work is done on them (as discussed in previous > > > patchset revisions). > > > > > > * mark the old coremask parameter (-c) and service core mask (-s) as > > > deprecated, so they can be dropped in future. Everything should now be > > > done using core lists where possible. > > > * consolidate the, previously separate but similar, "-l" and "--lcores" > > > flags into just short and long versions of the same thing. This does > > > not affect the "--lcores" flag at all, but expands the scope of what > > > was possible with "-l". > > > * Add documentation of examples of use of the -l/--lcores parameter > > > > > > V5: adjust the examples in patch 3, to only use quotes where necessary > > > and explain in a note why they are sometimes used in the examples. > > > > > > Bruce Richardson (3): > > > eal: deprecate old coremask-based EAL parameters > > > eal: merge corelist and core mapping options > > > doc: provide examples of using lcores EAL parameter > > > > This first step looks reasonnable, > > but we need more acks for the deprecation. > > > > Applied without the first patch deprecating the famous -c option, pending > > for a later > > stage in this release cycle. > > > > Acked-by: vipin.vargh...@amd.com > > We had been using `core-mask` on DELL servers where BIOS is configured for > Round Robin core mapping. All even for socket 0 and all odd for socket 1. But > can work around by using or forcing use of `lcores` > Thanks Vipin.
Any other acks, or alternatively any concerns about this deprecation? Note that there is no date given for the removal of the coremask functionality. I would not expect its removal before the 25.11 release, which means that it should stick around in the LTS release. If people prefer, I can respin this patch to give a definite date for removal, or we can leave it as it is now with "the future" being an unspecified time. Personally, I'd rather leave it unspecified to give as long as possible changeover time for this, given that coremask functionality has been around for so long. /Bruce
