netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Andrei Gherzan <andrei.gherzan@canonical.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_tx: Cater for pending datagrams zerocopy benchmarking
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 15:51:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9ca623d01274889913001ce92f686652fa8fea8.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230131130412.432549-4-andrei.gherzan@canonical.com>

On Tue, 2023-01-31 at 13:04 +0000, Andrei Gherzan wrote:
> The test tool can check that the zerocopy number of completions value is
> valid taking into consideration the number of datagram send calls. This can
> catch the system into a state where the datagrams are still in the system
> (for example in a qdisk, waiting for the network interface to return a
> completion notification, etc).
> 
> This change adds a retry logic of computing the number of completions up to
> a configurable (via CLI) timeout (default: 2 seconds).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrei Gherzan <andrei.gherzan@canonical.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c | 38 +++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c
> index b47b5c32039f..5a29b5f24023 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static int	cfg_payload_len	= (1472 * 42);
>  static int	cfg_port	= 8000;
>  static int	cfg_runtime_ms	= -1;
>  static bool	cfg_poll;
> +static int	cfg_poll_loop_timeout_ms = 2000;
>  static bool	cfg_segment;
>  static bool	cfg_sendmmsg;
>  static bool	cfg_tcp;
> @@ -235,16 +236,17 @@ static void flush_errqueue_recv(int fd)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static void flush_errqueue(int fd, const bool do_poll)
> +static void flush_errqueue(int fd, const bool do_poll,
> +		unsigned long poll_timeout, const bool poll_err)
>  {
>  	if (do_poll) {
>  		struct pollfd fds = {0};
>  		int ret;
>  
>  		fds.fd = fd;
> -		ret = poll(&fds, 1, 500);
> +		ret = poll(&fds, 1, poll_timeout);
>  		if (ret == 0) {
> -			if (cfg_verbose)
> +			if ((cfg_verbose) && (poll_err))
>  				fprintf(stderr, "poll timeout\n");
>  		} else if (ret < 0) {
>  			error(1, errno, "poll");
> @@ -254,6 +256,22 @@ static void flush_errqueue(int fd, const bool do_poll)
>  	flush_errqueue_recv(fd);
>  }
>  
> +static void flush_errqueue_retry(int fd, const bool do_poll, unsigned long num_sends)
> +{
> +	unsigned long tnow, tstop;
> +	bool first_try = true;
> +
> +	tnow = gettimeofday_ms();
> +	tstop = tnow + cfg_poll_loop_timeout_ms;
> +	do {
> +		flush_errqueue(fd, do_poll, tstop - tnow, first_try);
> +		first_try = false;
> +		if (!do_poll)
> +			usleep(1000);  // a throttling delay if polling is enabled

Even if the kernel codying style is not very strictly enforced for
self-tests, please avoid c++ style comments.

More importantly, as Willem noded, this function is always called with
do_poll == true. You should drop such argument and the related branch
above.

> +		tnow = gettimeofday_ms();
> +	} while ((stat_zcopies != num_sends) && (tnow < tstop));
> +}
> +
>  static int send_tcp(int fd, char *data)
>  {
>  	int ret, done = 0, count = 0;
> @@ -413,8 +431,9 @@ static int send_udp_segment(int fd, char *data)
>  
>  static void usage(const char *filepath)
>  {
> -	error(1, 0, "Usage: %s [-46acmHPtTuvz] [-C cpu] [-D dst ip] [-l secs] [-M messagenr] [-p port] [-s sendsize] [-S gsosize]",
> -		    filepath);
> +	error(1, 0,
> +			"Usage: %s [-46acmHPtTuvz] [-C cpu] [-D dst ip] [-l secs] [-L secs] [-M messagenr] [-p port] [-s sendsize] [-S gsosize]",
> +			filepath);

Please avoid introducing unnecessary white-space changes (no reason to
move the usage text on a new line)

Cheers,

Paolo


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-01-31 14:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-31 13:04 [PATCH v2 1/4] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_rx: Fix 'used uninitialized' compiler warning Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_rx/tx: Stop when wrong CLI args are provided Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:35   ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-01-31 14:40     ` Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] selftests: net: udpgso_bench: Fix racing bug between the rx/tx programs Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:33   ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-01-31 14:45     ` Paolo Abeni
2023-01-31 14:56     ` Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_tx: Cater for pending datagrams zerocopy benchmarking Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 13:39   ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-01-31 14:51   ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2023-01-31 15:08     ` Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 16:22       ` Paolo Abeni
2023-01-31 16:31         ` Andrei Gherzan
2023-01-31 18:26           ` Paolo Abeni
2023-01-31 20:36             ` Andrei Gherzan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=d9ca623d01274889913001ce92f686652fa8fea8.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=andrei.gherzan@canonical.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).