[PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags unit test

[PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags unit test

[Pablo de Lara]

From: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, vdev flag
was being tested, but test fails, as a secondary process
cannot allocate memzones, so it cannot create the device
and application exits. Also, this can be tested in ring
pmd test, which needs vdev and not in whitelist, which
should only test --pci-whitelist.

Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.

Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
---
 app/test/test_eal_flags.c |    4 ----
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
index 1b80b80..7c6656b 100644
--- a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
+++ b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
@@ -58,7 +58,6 @@
 #define no_huge "--no-huge"
 #define no_shconf "--no-shconf"
 #define pci_whitelist "--pci-whitelist"
-#define vdev "--vdev"
 #define memtest "memtest"
 #define memtest1 "memtest1"
 #define memtest2 "memtest2"
@@ -317,9 +316,6 @@ test_whitelist_flag(void)
 	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
 			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3,type=test",
 			pci_whitelist, "08:00.1,type=normal",
-#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_RING
-			vdev, "eth_ring,arg=test",
-#endif
 	};
 
 	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(wlinval) / sizeof(wlinval[0]); i++) {
-- 
1.7.0.7

Re: [PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags unit test

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Pablo,

On 06/30/2014 04:42 PM, Pablo de Lara wrote:
> From: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
>
> In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, vdev flag
> was being tested, but test fails, as a secondary process
> cannot allocate memzones, so it cannot create the device
> and application exits. Also, this can be tested in ring
> pmd test, which needs vdev and not in whitelist, which
> should only test --pci-whitelist.
>
> Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
> from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

If the test cannot success because it is started from a secondary
process, do you think it is possible to do it with a primary process?

I did a quick test and it works (see my patch in the same thread), but
as I'm not really familiar with this part of the code, I may have
forgotten something.

Regards,
Olivier

[PATCH] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags

[Olivier Matz]

In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, the vdev flag test fails
because it is started in a secondary process, which is not able to
allocate memzones and this is required to instanciate a pmd_ring.

This patch changes the vdev flag test to run it in a primary process.

Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
---
 app/test/test_eal_flags.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
index 1b80b80..ca47bb2 100644
--- a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
+++ b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
 #define no_shconf "--no-shconf"
 #define pci_whitelist "--pci-whitelist"
 #define vdev "--vdev"
+#define whitelist_prefix "whitelist"
 #define memtest "memtest"
 #define memtest1 "memtest1"
 #define memtest2 "memtest2"
@@ -314,7 +315,8 @@ test_whitelist_flag(void)
 			pci_whitelist, "00FF:09:0B.3"};
 	const char *wlval2[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
 			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3", pci_whitelist, "0a:0b.1"};
-	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
+	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, "--prefix=" whitelist_prefix,
+			"-n", "1", "-c", "1",
 			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3,type=test",
 			pci_whitelist, "08:00.1,type=normal",
 #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_RING
-- 
1.9.2

Re: [PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags unit test

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

Hi Olivier,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 9:31 AM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org
> Cc: Olivier MATZ
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags
> unit test
> 
> Hi Pablo,
> 
> On 06/30/2014 04:42 PM, Pablo de Lara wrote:
> > From: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> >
> > In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, vdev flag
> > was being tested, but test fails, as a secondary process
> > cannot allocate memzones, so it cannot create the device
> > and application exits. Also, this can be tested in ring
> > pmd test, which needs vdev and not in whitelist, which
> > should only test --pci-whitelist.
> >
> > Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
> > from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> 
> If the test cannot success because it is started from a secondary
> process, do you think it is possible to do it with a primary process?
> 
> I did a quick test and it works (see my patch in the same thread), but
> as I'm not really familiar with this part of the code, I may have
> forgotten something.
> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

I checked your patch, and I got this:

...

EAL: Detected lcore 38 as core 11 on socket 1
EAL: Detected lcore 39 as core 12 on socket 1
EAL: Support maximum 64 logical core(s) by configuration.
EAL: Detected 40 lcore(s)
./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/test: unrecognized option '--prefix=whitelist'

Also, I thought we could not run two primary process at the same time 
(considering that the test app is a primary process).

Thanks,
Pablo

Re: [PATCH] app/test: Removed vdev test in EAL flags unit test

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Pablo,

On 07/01/2014 10:59 AM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> I checked your patch, and I got this:
>
> ...
>
> EAL: Detected lcore 38 as core 11 on socket 1
> EAL: Detected lcore 39 as core 12 on socket 1
> EAL: Support maximum 64 logical core(s) by configuration.
> EAL: Detected 40 lcore(s)
> ./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/test: unrecognized option '--prefix=whitelist'

I'm sorry, I cleaned the patch without retesting it, and I
introduced a bug in it (--prefix instead of --file-prefix).

Please find the new one as a reply to this mail.
When I test it, I get:

[...]
EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes
EAL: Virtual area found at 0x2aaba4c00000 (size = 0x200000)
EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes
EAL: Virtual area found at 0x2aaba4e00000 (size = 0x200000)
EAL: Ask a virtual area of 0x200000 bytes
EAL: Virtual area found at 0x2aaba5000000 (size = 0x200000)
EAL: Requesting 984 pages of size 2MB from socket 0
EAL: Requesting 1000 pages of size 2MB from socket 1
EAL: TSC frequency is ~3333293 KHz
EAL: Master core 0 is ready (tid=ab9044e0)
PMD: Initializing pmd_ring for eth_ring
PMD: Error parsing device, invalid key <arg>
PMD: Ignoring unsupported parameters when creating rings-backed ethernet 
device
PMD: Creating rings-backed ethdev on numa socket 0

> Also, I thought we could not run two primary process at the same time
> (considering that the test app is a primary process).

Some other tests in the same file launch a primary process,
I suppose it should work if the prefix for huge-pages is different.

Regards,
Olivier

[PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags

[Olivier Matz]

In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, the vdev flag test fails
because it is started in a secondary process, which is not able to
allocate memzones and this is required to instanciate a pmd_ring.

This patch changes the vdev flag test to run it in a primary process.

Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
---
 app/test/test_eal_flags.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
index 1b80b80..4a50d37 100644
--- a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
+++ b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
 #define no_shconf "--no-shconf"
 #define pci_whitelist "--pci-whitelist"
 #define vdev "--vdev"
+#define whitelist_prefix "whitelist"
 #define memtest "memtest"
 #define memtest1 "memtest1"
 #define memtest2 "memtest2"
@@ -314,7 +315,8 @@ test_whitelist_flag(void)
 			pci_whitelist, "00FF:09:0B.3"};
 	const char *wlval2[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
 			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3", pci_whitelist, "0a:0b.1"};
-	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
+	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, "--file-prefix=" whitelist_prefix,
+			"-n", "1", "-c", "1",
 			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3,type=test",
 			pci_whitelist, "08:00.1,type=normal",
 #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_RING
-- 
1.9.2

Re: [PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

Hi Olivier,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 10:21 AM
> To: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> Cc: olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
> Subject: [PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags
> 
> In whitelist test, within EAL flags unit test, the vdev flag test fails
> because it is started in a secondary process, which is not able to
> allocate memzones and this is required to instanciate a pmd_ring.
> 
> This patch changes the vdev flag test to run it in a primary process.
> 
> Patch "app/test: fix build switches to enable cmdline tests"
> from Thomas Monjalon is needed for this patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>  app/test/test_eal_flags.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> index 1b80b80..4a50d37 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@
>  #define no_shconf "--no-shconf"
>  #define pci_whitelist "--pci-whitelist"
>  #define vdev "--vdev"
> +#define whitelist_prefix "whitelist"
>  #define memtest "memtest"
>  #define memtest1 "memtest1"
>  #define memtest2 "memtest2"
> @@ -314,7 +315,8 @@ test_whitelist_flag(void)
>  			pci_whitelist, "00FF:09:0B.3"};
>  	const char *wlval2[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
>  			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3", pci_whitelist, "0a:0b.1"};
> -	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, prefix, mp_flag, "-n", "1", "-c", "1",
> +	const char *wlval3[] = {prgname, "--file-prefix=" whitelist_prefix,
> +			"-n", "1", "-c", "1",
>  			pci_whitelist, "09:0B.3,type=test",
>  			pci_whitelist, "08:00.1,type=normal",
>  #ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_RING
> --
> 1.9.2

Thanks for this. It works fine :) Actually, I am thinking of creating a separate test
for vdev, out of whitelist test, as it has no relation with it. Do you agree on this?
Thanks,
Pablo

Re: [PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Pablo,

On 07/01/2014 01:44 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> Thanks for this. It works fine :)

Thanks for testing!

> Actually, I am thinking of creating a separate test
> for vdev, out of whitelist test, as it has no relation with it. Do you agree on this?

I have no problem with that, it makes sense. Just to confirm: it means
that Thomas should not apply our previous patches from this thread and
wait for your next one, right?

Regards,
Olivier

Re: [PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 1:01 PM
> To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo; dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] app/test: fix vdev test in test_eal_flags
> 
> Hi Pablo,
> 
> On 07/01/2014 01:44 PM, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> > Thanks for this. It works fine :)
> 
> Thanks for testing!
> 
> > Actually, I am thinking of creating a separate test
> > for vdev, out of whitelist test, as it has no relation with it. Do you agree on
> this?
> 
> I have no problem with that, it makes sense. Just to confirm: it means
> that Thomas should not apply our previous patches from this thread and
> wait for your next one, right?

That's it :)

> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

Thanks,
Pablo