From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2CFA057B; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:51:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96B981C0B6; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:51:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A1851C0B1 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:51:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57905C00DE; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:51:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 01 Apr 2020 13:51:12 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=Mzy+6Q12Nv4sNjWIaEKCGifXDvpmJHPjArvjN5sj5Lo=; b=H//EsyvKGNHc XHQXT1ZtuutOsUNorAnRGy+MReQXP49sWBwUHsV9qZgd+M+gObfR7xCu/RLTffga T1q4pAV/pYPjtmlgByhhq5oxS8sXDLsT15PKIT6TB13A62hcpSNgrSX8BpzG275g rvBSz9+xWf9oo1cTN7JIT89Qyk17SJQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Mzy+6Q12Nv4sNjWIaEKCGifXDvpmJHPjArvjN5sj5 Lo=; b=u07nWCCaX90Sql/jhbm2wZzPkYG4HoLbxCnCceDkeNIjJacrcYanEr+Ye wtXqQORmL7dY9dJOHjxwu3PIre7G4PQcOath+2WMOXZPMeCtcvdii+6eLuM3rcSS Rke4DieYlK89OsW230k3N3bnwtSrBGMI1bR4G03PhUeqLueu/72k62ymbCDGxCpN Yqzxr02RSE0n1G0mCBA012Uwjsuar23ciITJ03EvQTjaktwWCXHHcnvSHSJuvXYj pYbdz8fLrgNIr9zzZBknJo6g2K66sBcjEoATC50UDHd3EmFESkh9K4ylri/pMSwt trMdvO1NvAkJEbmT4WEHQZYZGaALA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrtddvgdduudeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6AE433280066; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:51:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Lukasz Wojciechowski , Akhil Goyal Cc: "declan.doherty@intel.com" , dev@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 19:51:10 +0200 Message-ID: <1703484.4MS8fQxZnU@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20200312151654.7218-1-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> <20200312151654.7218-6-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 05/13] app/test: introduce librte_security tests X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 01/04/2020 19:09, Akhil Goyal: > Hi Lukasz, > > > This patch introduces set of unit tests of librte_security API functions. > > Tests are added to dpdk-test application and can be run with > > "security_autotest" runtime command. > > > > This is the first patch in the series of patches as adding all test cases > > for all API functions in a single patch would make it unreadable. > > > > This patch defines structure of the file and necessary test framework > > initialization. It also contains first subset of unit tests for > > rte_security_session_create API function. > > > > Structure of the tests file is following: > > - macros for making tests more readable; > > - mockup structures and functions for rte_security_ops; > > - test suite and test cases setup and teardown functions; > > - tests functions; > > - declaration of testcases. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Wojciechowski > > Change-Id: I3a4585f56ef1a75b2984fcea3a3e4a30e4c2d8a6 > > --- > > This patchset has a lot of repeated(for each API) tests just to check the input parameters to > Rte_security APIs. I am not sure what value addition is done to separate out each API as a separate > Negative Test. Instead a single case can be added to test all APIs with inappropriate arguments. > We should add more positive cases with proper session parameters. > > Thomas, > Do we allow these type of test cases in other modules? I did not review these patches, but I think we can try to compare with tests done on eventdev library. It would be interesting to have an opinion from Declan. These rte_security tests look quite big. However I don't know what is too big for test code? Lukasz, please could you explain the initial motivation when writing these tests? Are you especially interested in rte_security? Or do you plan to reproduce this effort on other libraries?