From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
To: "Krakowiak, LukaszX" <lukaszx.krakowiak@intel.com>,
"Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] test: add UT for power turbo feature
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:01:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f769c7af-216d-e3f7-95f8-e415c0147223@intel.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190403100104.hHMcMEWSeBs7916XFzIe2lM9GPIFffsZS93qfCtR9Ls@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DC695E1BE92F754CA2AE786BE043D81318DDD43C@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 03-Apr-19 10:07 AM, Krakowiak, LukaszX wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On 07-Mar-19 1:59 PM, Lukasz Krakowiak wrote:
>>> Add UT check_power_turbo.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Krakowiak <lukaszx.krakowiak@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c | 72
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c
>>> b/app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c index d099f2f47..c75c9bf1c 100644
>>> --- a/app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c
>>> +++ b/app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c
>>> @@ -366,6 +366,59 @@ check_power_freq_min(void)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/* Check rte_power_turbo() */
>>> +static int
>>> +check_power_turbo(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (rte_power_turbo_status(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID) == 0) {
>>> + printf("Turbo not available on lcore %u, skipping test\n",
>>> + TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>
>> Misleading indentation, please add two tabs to the second line of
>> printf() statement.
>>
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* test with an invalid lcore id */
>>> + ret = rte_power_freq_enable_turbo(TEST_POWER_LCORE_INVALID);
>>> + if (ret >= 0) {
>>> + printf("Unexpectedly enable turbo successfully "
>>> + "on lcore %u\n",
>> TEST_POWER_LCORE_INVALID);
>>
>> Please don't break up strings to multiple lines.
>>
>>> + return -1;
>>> + }
>>> + ret = rte_power_freq_enable_turbo(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>> + printf("Fail to enable turbo on lcore %u\n",
>>> +
>> TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>
>> I wish there was a middle ground between no indentation and way too much
>> indentation...
>>
>>> + return -1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Check the current frequency */
>>> + ret = check_cur_freq(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID, 0);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + return -1;
>>> +
>>> + /* test with an invalid lcore id */
>>> + ret = rte_power_freq_disable_turbo(TEST_POWER_LCORE_INVALID);
>>> + if (ret >= 0) {
>>> + printf("Unexpectedly disable turbo successfully "
>>> + "on lcore %u\n",
>> TEST_POWER_LCORE_INVALID);
>>
>> Same as above, don't break up strings.
>>
>>> + return -1;
>>> + }
>>> + ret = rte_power_freq_disable_turbo(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>> + printf("Fail to disable turbo on lcore %u\n",
>>> +
>> TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>
>> Same as above, two tabs is enough indentation.
>>
>>> + return -1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* Check the current frequency */
>>> + ret = check_cur_freq(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID, 1);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + return -1;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static int
>>> test_power_cpufreq(void)
>>> {
>>> @@ -427,6 +480,21 @@ test_power_cpufreq(void)
>>> "been initialised\n");
>>> goto fail_all;
>>> }
>>> + if (rte_power_turbo_status == NULL) {
>>> + printf("rte_power_turbo_status should not be NULL,
>> environment has not "
>>> + "been initialised\n");
>>
>> Here and below:
>>
>> I don't think saying *why* it should not be NULL - just saying that it shouldn't be
>> NULL is enough. Maybe mention why it's supposed to be not NULL in comments
>> here.
>>
>> Also, i have a suspicion that the message is wrong - why would status be null if
>> the environment was initialized? Presumably it's the other way around?
>
> I think this is correctly: if env was initialized, pointer != NULL, otherwise env wasn't initialized.
> Rest of all, you are right: coding style issues. Thanks.
The check is if rte_power_turbo_status is equal to NULL. If the check
fails (i.e. rte_power_turbo_status is not NULL), we get an error message
saying that rte_power_turbo_status should not be NULL. That doesn't
compute :) Either it should not be NULL and the check is wrong, or it
should be NULL and the error message is wrong.
>>
>>> + goto fail_all;
>>> + }
>>> + if (rte_power_freq_enable_turbo == NULL) {
>>> + printf("rte_power_freq_enable_turbo should not be NULL,
>> environment has not "
>>> + "been initialised\n");
>>> + goto fail_all;
>>> + }
>>> + if (rte_power_freq_disable_turbo == NULL) {
>>> + printf("rte_power_freq_disable_turbo should not be NULL,
>> environment has not "
>>> + "been initialised\n");
>>> + goto fail_all;
>>> + }
>>>
>>> ret = rte_power_exit(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>> @@ -502,6 +570,10 @@ test_power_cpufreq(void)
>>> if (ret < 0)
>>> goto fail_all;
>>>
>>> + ret = check_power_turbo();
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + goto fail_all;
>>> +
>>> ret = rte_power_exit(TEST_POWER_LCORE_ID);
>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>> printf("Cannot exit power management for lcore %u\n",
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Anatoly
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-03 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-07 13:59 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] test: improve test coverage for power library Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-03-07 13:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] test: rename test_power_acpi_cpufreq.c -> app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-03-27 15:05 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-03-27 15:05 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-03-07 13:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] test: remove prefix _acpi from UT power function/test names Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-03-27 15:07 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-03-27 15:07 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-03-29 22:40 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-29 22:40 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-07 13:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] test: add UT for power turbo feature Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-03-27 15:13 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-03-27 15:13 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-04-03 9:07 ` Krakowiak, LukaszX
2019-04-03 9:07 ` Krakowiak, LukaszX
2019-04-03 10:01 ` Burakov, Anatoly [this message]
2019-04-03 10:01 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-04-03 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/3] test: improve test coverage for power library Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] test: rename test_power_acpi_cpufreq.c -> app/test/test_power_cpufreq.c Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] test: remove prefix _acpi from UT power function/test names Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-15 15:14 ` Hunt, David
2019-04-15 15:14 ` Hunt, David
2019-04-15 15:32 ` Kevin Traynor
2019-04-15 15:32 ` Kevin Traynor
2019-04-03 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] test: add UT for power turbo feature Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-03 10:32 ` Lukasz Krakowiak
2019-04-15 15:22 ` Hunt, David
2019-04-15 15:22 ` Hunt, David
2019-06-07 8:45 ` Hajkowski, MarcinX
2019-04-22 20:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/3] test: improve test coverage for power library Thomas Monjalon
2019-04-22 20:42 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-05 7:35 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=f769c7af-216d-e3f7-95f8-e415c0147223@intel.com \
--to=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=david.hunt@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=lukaszx.krakowiak@intel.com \
/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).