From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] test: add basic bus infrastructure tests Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 08:28:39 +0100 Message-ID: <2193672.0sRautH3mz@xps13> References: <1484647774-28984-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Shreyansh Jain Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com (mail-wm0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4050D567C for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 08:28:42 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id r126so233429590wmr.0 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 23:28:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2017-01-18 06:56, Shreyansh Jain: > > > > +/* Bus list exposed */ > > > > +extern struct rte_bus_list rte_bus_list; > > > > > > I think it should be possible to write a test without the real list > > > of registered bus. > > > > Yes, it is possible. I just modeled it on test_pci assuming that is a kind of > > expected/standard. But, it seems probably it is not. I will change the tests. > > After sending out this mail I realized the real reason for using the actual lists. Functions like rte_eal_pci_register (for PCI) or rte_bus_register (for Bus), use global lists for registration. Test cases calls these functions for registering dummy device/bus. Why access to the bus list is externally required? I feel there is something wrong here. It should be private in PCI. > One way is to not worry about adding these test/dummy devices/buses to original list as they would be unregistered anyway. But, risk is of impacting running list assuming multiple cases need to be run from same application/binary context. > > Another way is to rewrite these functions locally in test case, but that also means not testing these global registration/de-registration functions. > > Former method would continue to have symbols exported. Later is not testing some entry/exit functions of a sub-system. > > You still interested in this change? I would prefer you do not lose time with testing at this stage.