[v5] build: prevent accidentally building without NUMA support

  When libnuma development package is missing on a system, DPDK can still
be built but will be missing much-needed support for NUMA memory
management. This may later cause issues at runtime if the resulting
binary is run on a NUMA system.

We can reduce the incidence of such runtime errors by ensuring that, for
native builds*, libnuma is present - unless the user actually specifies
via "max_numa_nodes" that they don't require NUMA support. Having this
as an error condition is also in keeping with what is documented in the
Linux GSG doc, where libnuma is listed as a requirement for building
DPDK [1].

* NOTE: cross-compilation builds have a different logic set, with a
  separate "numa" value indicating if numa support is necessary.

[1] https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-23.03/linux_gsg/sys_reqs.html

Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>

---
V5: Rebase on main, since dependencies merged

V4: Add Depends-on tag so CI picks up dependency

V3:
- install 32-bit libnuma packages on CI systems [thanks to David
  for the changes]
- split the patch out of the previous patchset, so it can be tracked
  separately from the more minor fixup changes.

V2: Limit check to linux only
---
 .github/workflows/build.yml | 5 ++++-
 config/meson.build          | 9 +++++++++
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
  

15/06/2023 16:38, Bruce Richardson:
> When libnuma development package is missing on a system, DPDK can still
> be built but will be missing much-needed support for NUMA memory
> management. This may later cause issues at runtime if the resulting
> binary is run on a NUMA system.
> 
> We can reduce the incidence of such runtime errors by ensuring that, for
> native builds*, libnuma is present - unless the user actually specifies
> via "max_numa_nodes" that they don't require NUMA support. Having this
> as an error condition is also in keeping with what is documented in the
> Linux GSG doc, where libnuma is listed as a requirement for building
> DPDK [1].
> 
> * NOTE: cross-compilation builds have a different logic set, with a
>   separate "numa" value indicating if numa support is necessary.
> 
> [1] https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-23.03/linux_gsg/sys_reqs.html
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> 
> ---
> V5: Rebase on main, since dependencies merged
> 
> V4: Add Depends-on tag so CI picks up dependency
> 
> V3:
> - install 32-bit libnuma packages on CI systems [thanks to David
>   for the changes]
> - split the patch out of the previous patchset, so it can be tracked
>   separately from the more minor fixup changes.
> 
> V2: Limit check to linux only

Is the test ci/Intel-compilation fixed?
Could you send a new version for testing the CI?
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2023 9:27 PM
> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] build: prevent accidentally building without NUMA
> support
> 
> 15/06/2023 16:38, Bruce Richardson:
> > When libnuma development package is missing on a system, DPDK can
> > still be built but will be missing much-needed support for NUMA memory
> > management. This may later cause issues at runtime if the resulting
> > binary is run on a NUMA system.
> >
> > We can reduce the incidence of such runtime errors by ensuring that,
> > for native builds*, libnuma is present - unless the user actually
> > specifies via "max_numa_nodes" that they don't require NUMA support.
> > Having this as an error condition is also in keeping with what is
> > documented in the Linux GSG doc, where libnuma is listed as a
> > requirement for building DPDK [1].
> >
> > * NOTE: cross-compilation builds have a different logic set, with a
> >   separate "numa" value indicating if numa support is necessary.
> >
> > [1] https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-23.03/linux_gsg/sys_reqs.html
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> >
> > ---
> > V5: Rebase on main, since dependencies merged
> >
> > V4: Add Depends-on tag so CI picks up dependency
> >
> > V3:
> > - install 32-bit libnuma packages on CI systems [thanks to David
> >   for the changes]
> > - split the patch out of the previous patchset, so it can be tracked
> >   separately from the more minor fixup changes.
> >
> > V2: Limit check to linux only
> 
> Is the test ci/Intel-compilation fixed?
> Could you send a new version for testing the CI?
> 

Sorry, this is caused by intel testbeds lack of dep libnuma, Installed it and re-run the CI, result is PASSED.
  

28/06/2023 05:03, Tu, Lijuan:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 15/06/2023 16:38, Bruce Richardson:
> > Is the test ci/Intel-compilation fixed?
> > Could you send a new version for testing the CI?
> > 
> 
> Sorry, this is caused by intel testbeds lack of dep libnuma, Installed it and re-run the CI, result is PASSED.

Applied, thanks.