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 4F3D6A0C43; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 01:57:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C27414067A; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 01:57:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D522C40040 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 01:57:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1061) id B9C4F20B8008; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 16:57:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com B9C4F20B8008 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1633046256; bh=mRWkShMTi2FG2wFbwi5P5O/rzOAlUUGoUuWyWBy6YR4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mLVqMblvKFD9tavQlRAaEAK3bFJt0Gkkmp8bFRsCtCdmKkokKHcjg27l/be1hhjS+ dutiNhqXZ25hZryNH/hgIrVBhvwEHlvcaYyK5sbbmG6GjRRH61TCHPO6M9+Hm1ARxO 8sw8bBs3VhqtY3yBUlIoPM8GXYD3BZvToFf9+lFc= Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 16:57:36 -0700 From: Jie Zhou To: Dmitry Kozlyuk Cc: Aaron Conole , dev@dpdk.org, roretzla@microsoft.com, navasile@linux.microsoft.com, dmitrym@microsoft.com, pallavi.kadam@intel.com, talshn@nvidia.com, thomas@monjalon.net Message-ID: <20210930235736.GA4743@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <1629306834-6277-1-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <1630729155-24584-1-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <1630729155-24584-14-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <20210908221423.GA10148@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <20210923103537.48e90b45@sovereign> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210923103537.48e90b45@sovereign> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 13/13] app/test: enable subset of unit tests on Windows X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:35:37AM +0300, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote: > 2021-09-08 15:14 (UTC-0700), Jie Zhou: > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:43:56AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > > > Jie Zhou writes: > > > > > > > Enable a subset of unit tests on Windows. Currently not all the > > > > dependencies (e.g. libraries and some functionalities) of all unit > > > > tests are supported on Windows yet. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jie Zhou > > > > --- > > > > > > Hi Jie, > > > > > > How is it expected that a developer will add unit tests here? For > > > example, let's pretend I develop some new test. Do I insert it into the > > > non-windows section or the 'all' section? Will it ever be moved common > > > (for example, do windows development team aim to provide some additional > > > test / review cycles for new tests added)? This have some implication > > > on how developers need to add tests - maybe there can be a documented > > > process for getting code more common (between windows / linux / > > > freebsd)? > > > > > > -Aaron > > > > > > PS: I would suggest a possible route is to update to the doc proposed in > > > http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20210714164047.511561-1-aconole@redhat.com/ > > > but it still isn't merged. > > > > Thank you Aaron for bringing up this great question! Totally agree that we need some discussion on what is the expectation for onboarding new unit tests from different OS teams. For new tests that definitely missing supports on certain OS(s), should it be authored in a way for across all OSs but skip not supported ones at the beginning? Or just onboard for supported OS thus only add to the non-windows section for example, and later DPDK Windows team move it to common section after porting? I will bring this up in DPDK Windows Community meeting and discuss there first. Yes, we should update the doc (after your change merged) on the process once reaching some agreement. > > Hi Aaron, Jie, > > Currently tests that should not run on certain platforms are disabled with > #ifdef. This has an advantage that these tests mark themselves as skipped. > There are no principal objections against this approach instead of many lists. > Many tests files will need to be modified, but only mechanically. > > New tests for generic features should be cross-platform by default; why not? > An exception I can think of is EAL that may implement some new API only for > one OS. In this case the best we can do is to make sure the test code is not > inherently bound to some OS. This is something we can document. For example, > it should use instead of including Unix network headers directly. Thank you Dmitry. I will address this in V4 to use consolidated lists across all platforms. Aaron, please let me know if any other comments or concerns I can address together in V4. Thanks.