From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 208694307F; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BA3C410D0; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:15:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D8E40EF0 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:15:50 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1692184549; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+rEV2M546O8tCuZXYph/KJJPLNl5RxIDrXFC//UlkoA=; b=fUsl/wR32ZKq3EgZ937HSJGApBYhiWshGuu4HTTLACLhdSgoYHvtC5YR5DuluP2Sel/Tg5 GHMtYgAVaUVlw+CjIAMvRW5Rw3LiwdvJPDpfhcnppvpRKvEWtVuN3LF0AGHxSuGZZ/8R8c 6wqr+Api+kJIGzR58GL9bkZlWyJrIKE= Received: from mail-lj1-f200.google.com (mail-lj1-f200.google.com [209.85.208.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-527-0OF01aSPOUWQ6R0okizCMA-1; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 07:15:48 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 0OF01aSPOUWQ6R0okizCMA-1 Received: by mail-lj1-f200.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2b9c22c3d68so36798141fa.1 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:15:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692184547; x=1692789347; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+rEV2M546O8tCuZXYph/KJJPLNl5RxIDrXFC//UlkoA=; b=BCn1QIY93WaA8biS9+yBVUTF/DuvpNbrQdLW6ZtNQJIu+J3raZOf97YKYHiNwwr51o N9p+eQpXnbZp2KkE3sXAyHa7tzA351RCUIJhkkxoNGuaZLJo+UH8EDFk0ZrixdE2zHpA T/kwVFpUImKNG6+krqrjiIilN2PBGwyv6elo5StYK4wYl4Oi+zb3EMkXwOsW8sRcYuDa O2ftdMWJxkNPLrMSSJgcYR8oh1dEGVxfaYddoZdkCa0GPrU2npfUvch2hy0dgbD47/Ac cNMn2Qshv12gGhopjCwbqIEMifrOwy3Ov5sBM9lVPJgkM3xJZwgEeKXeDhtE0gkKStFk rY0A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwY7A05RSDeIsJPOenVYSycJDJOHqinJ9QtquOdS/McD5IwSKcp 6YIVq4I+fsgoIICEvYLkheQNr9dIZTixnhOoGKkqnGexyzhKLdPKv8ozVuZ/Y/nRBXsoqPZfqDA rZEkQvGI+E7g5lKKBtA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1308:b0:2b6:b30f:5bf with SMTP id u8-20020a05651c130800b002b6b30f05bfmr1915403lja.13.1692184547152; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:15:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHhUzcIjf26Kl98CSwsZBpcD+uTWGKpMb64FBlLP0vaD7zAg1jWVdOXPWuof9EL3Gbuh5bXTWYL1VwTLvXfR6M= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1308:b0:2b6:b30f:5bf with SMTP id u8-20020a05651c130800b002b6b30f05bfmr1915395lja.13.1692184546835; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:15:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230721115125.55137-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20230815151053.996469-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20230815151053.996469-6-bruce.richardson@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:15:35 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/10] app/test: define unit tests suites based on test macros To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ci@dpdk.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ci-bounces@dpdk.org On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 1:02=E2=80=AFPM Bruce Richardson wrote: > These lines here seem to be exposing a bug in the mempool unit tests for > shared builds, which is why we have a CI failure. > > The mempool unit tests use the mempool "create_empty" API, and then call > the populate APIs to finish setting up the mempool. However, the > create_empty API does not explicitly configure a particular set of mempoo= l > ops for the new mempool, leaving the ops field at 0. This means that unle= ss > the app explicitly sets other ops, the mempool will use the ops from > whatever driver registers itself first. This occurs even when the driver = is > unsuitable, e.g. on my Intel system, the dpaa2 is first on the list, > leading to failures in setting up and using the mempool. Hum, it sounds like a bug to me. The dpaa2 driver should not be registered as the default (or here, default platform) mempool. Other mempool drivers ensure that required hw is available, I guess dpaa2 is missing some check. > > In v6 of this set, I intend to fix this, by changing the create empty API > to explicitly set the ring driver as default for new mempools. It's the > most likely to work for common cases. --=20 David Marchand