From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/11] event/octeontx: modify octeontx
 eventdev test
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:48:46 +0530
Message-ID: <20171227051845.dxmrfk7mszta4epb@Pavan-LT>
References: <20171212192713.17620-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20171225191738.17151-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20171225191738.17151-4-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20171226141156.GB15284@neilslaptop.think-freely.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com,
 harry.van.haaren@intel.com, gage.eads@intel.com, liang.j.ma@intel.com
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM03-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-by2nam03on0074.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.42.74])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C128B1B2A7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 06:19:09 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171226141156.GB15284@neilslaptop.think-freely.org>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi Neil,

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 09:11:56AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 12:47:31AM +0530, Pavan Nikhilesh wrote:
> > Modify test_eventdev_octeontx to be standalone selftest independent of
> > test framework.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c | 427 +++++++++++++----------
> >  1 file changed, 234 insertions(+), 193 deletions(-)
> >
<snip>
> >
> >  static void
> > @@ -177,31 +187,34 @@ _eventdev_setup(int mode)
> >  					512, /* Use very small mbufs */
> >  					rte_socket_id());
> >  	if (!eventdev_test_mempool) {
> > -		printf("ERROR creating mempool\n");
> > -		return TEST_FAILED;
> > +		ssovf_log_dbg("ERROR creating mempool");
> > +		return -1;
> >  	}
> >
> >  	ret = rte_event_dev_info_get(evdev, &info);
> > -	TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to get event dev info");
> > -	TEST_ASSERT(info.max_num_events >= (int32_t)MAX_EVENTS,
> > -			"max_num_events=%d < max_events=%d",
> > -			info.max_num_events, MAX_EVENTS);
> > +	RTE_TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to get event dev info");
> > +	if (!(info.max_num_events >= (int32_t)MAX_EVENTS)) {
> > +		ssovf_log_dbg("ERROR max_num_events=%d < max_events=%d",
> > +				info.max_num_events, MAX_EVENTS);
> > +		return -1;
> > +	}
> >
> I'm not sure how any of this is particularly adventageous.  You've replaced two
> ASSERTION macros with one and an additional conditional.  The assert macros are
> just a flexible as their were previously (which is to say, not overly so).  So
> i'm not sure what the advantage of renaming them is.

This is an unintended artifact while deciding between removing macros and
moving them to rte_test, I will clean it up in the next version.
Thanks for pointing it out.

Pavan

>
> Neil
>