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 6E4B8A0524; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:17:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEEAB161250; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:17:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CBDA16124F for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:17:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FDA75807EE; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 14:17:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 14:17:47 -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=fm3; bh= w21wTPjarT3lCwlru21n4XgL1EhTuqFNiNoK5/m2W2s=; b=0v0xowi+SbM7OLuE U+TJTfK3EuECPlktCfRy5FH3tSm2r/bPZY+tKr1DMCNEUAUdXUk6amwkeMpUIGdR cCCmw2UQVld1c7WLuN3xgKxGEW4FDqoSUrCjrWXcTS/y+n7/AGSoN0xSRuQhFXM4 p14/0Yx/XWpGaVg6f2HNwaoPVG7iEbux1N3NdbiYPT1uf5/edw7nkpJPCFW4bllD kRIUdMl942BwpXt3QiG8n3gE20xaf10cmmBOZVocQ/BTsGMuXdJxb6+vAH9k4EQ7 tglOn5B7mH2IkKt0QsksMxXwEKlsfpuDMAGF9cvRGctwnKLj93lqJ6aubCH8Ed2g 5IbZ4Q== 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=w21wTPjarT3lCwlru21n4XgL1EhTuqFNiNoK5/m2W 2s=; b=ur9vIf9/8ObVd2YrBDUKxIiaEC2wWMt/Q2RIcCL0bQoFvO8jvNXqTu63E qmWVN7zIAGqQDsTVphY9Duq+yTbFRvxQdwHYUyf7/5oFjrhVGCZHhAqLEK9kDzWS d2E6UKWx1C8LT5ZNitmIS0kKuO6OF1+9o3Tm9jrq4xtXblIKpDCkRJeb8x0oU8/p ngI5DMwoj7aGvKAm2N+NBzunhc+qPX38femyOkwZO4oP8/Kysvfc/MFrhefAJZMq WFN4zSKIXVmpfHNETADqz0+AHwSjgXkRtIzMzwthowGi0owFD/0qvCDjGVQv9kN9 Sbirg3umklJSSGRZthsB9Rl3CXG5w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudekledguddvfecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdej ueeiiedvffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrh fuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgr lhhonhdrnhgvth 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 DFBE7240068; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 14:17:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ciara Power , Akhil Goyal Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "declan.doherty@intel.com" , "aconole@redhat.com" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , Anoob Joseph , "ruifeng.wang@arm.com" , "asomalap@amd.com" , "ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com" , "g.singh@nxp.com" , Matan Azrad Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:17:43 +0200 Message-ID: <3037473.KXluT5kZs3@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20210402142424.1353789-1-ciara.power@intel.com> <20210402142424.1353789-4-ciara.power@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] [PATCH v2 3/6] test/crypto: refactor to use sub-testsuites 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" 13/04/2021 19:51, Akhil Goyal: > Splitting the complete testsuite into logical generic algo based sub testsuite > Is a good idea. I appreciate that. > > But introducing PMD based test suite is not recommended. We have been > trying from past few releases to clean this up. And this patch is again introducing > the same. When I first saw this series, I saw only the algo based splitting and > when it was run on the board, it was showing results in an organized way. > But this was not expected that, PMD based test suites are reintroduced by > Intel who helped in removing them in last few releases. > > This will make an unnecessary addition of duplicate code whenever a new PMD > is introduced. > > I recommend to use a single parent suite - cryptodev_testsuite and there > Can be multiple sub testsuites based on Algos etc. but not on the basis of PMD. +1 If a PMD has specifics, it should be expressed through the API, with capabilities or any other generic way.