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 9F187431E2; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 17:10:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC4B40697; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 17:10:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB79402C6 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 17:10:23 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1698073823; 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=t9ZUMgEEGeQa+AajTIfKtZO2AmF2lBvznF3FXYMDuJQ=; b=OMzUodlaIolFLocpeMRhCt961sdS5tN5AZu1xxr35lbVNWEXXaBzTvK8ZjXf5unu45Zox3 BhDslxyQNaAu7amSTnQfokMiCh8UqKtG+JBPpUw65tHgj8Wa8KNXwVuySQj+ENn7TGT354 wQ2PwgQdyc7nlZum9Uiy8NT0yLtZrew= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-90-6zmq3Su2MdqA_sqMjpOFIA-1; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:10:16 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 6zmq3Su2MdqA_sqMjpOFIA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-40839252e81so20102305e9.3 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:10:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1698073815; x=1698678615; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:subject:from:references:cc:to :content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=t9ZUMgEEGeQa+AajTIfKtZO2AmF2lBvznF3FXYMDuJQ=; b=YhU3FeVd/5uXG/P3VZbDfGlEINpXKhsU1B8DNU6U/wrlFnrIOO0guCRlNIF4LLw1R7 zk3uTiLU7XHJiRPzH/liVMcztbE17AKOwv3Mc4tJ9ed0ASNUNiH+Y2c2H8Xg8dqUtZfE RNhio6+ypypPYS+MSJgqSxD/sJfaFkOKbWFCESiz7+ljgZznoZZ6xI6TVo8mMPBlriAn dPTyRRXN2ltJ0Z3LJBIMncSKkzXdub3MwgI7k0iNtBFsLnM9Qh9ae5x+uPUNvMZW2IFu fAO85ikv+OegN0qcw1DarKKc14L7407HqsYBNdbLokhIsddJYqnngu+2QrV44I18uN2U g2zA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyEdnZQaR2FrQk40oLzn4MU+G/XKRGwc5dIStg0glL9qxMGBb5C J9ttklkqwyEMNCAhwDKQbrilK26qOXGj9UBDXTH21VcRC3xRguLr8iaFIYjryJQB4ClWryokHQV meu0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:ac9:b0:31a:e8e6:8a96 with SMTP id di9-20020a0560000ac900b0031ae8e68a96mr6885944wrb.67.1698073815370; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:10:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH5jGhUf6ZV6NNUb6oCectaYyHE9i1fLT0veD41kuBnjPsa1QOri+v7V+vcKscIOCxQqnPz2g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:ac9:b0:31a:e8e6:8a96 with SMTP id di9-20020a0560000ac900b0031ae8e68a96mr6885934wrb.67.1698073815071; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:10:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.36] ([78.19.74.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v3-20020adff683000000b0032d9523de65sm7878944wrp.48.2023.10.23.08.10.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:10:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <56551ac9-4ab9-fb93-f925-760c78b599ef@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 16:10:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 To: Maxime Coquelin , "Chautru, Nicolas" , "Vargas, Hernan" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "gakhil@marvell.com" , "Rix, Tom" Cc: "Zhang, Qi Z" , xuemingl@nvidia.com, luca.boccassi@microsoft.com References: <20230929181328.104311-1-hernan.vargas@intel.com> <20230929181328.104311-7-hernan.vargas@intel.com> <2b343232-93ce-445f-b47c-064a018ff93b@redhat.com> <8c26747d-28d7-41f7-948f-3f9e1d1315c3@redhat.com> From: Kevin Traynor Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for queue configure In-Reply-To: <8c26747d-28d7-41f7-948f-3f9e1d1315c3@redhat.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 On 23/10/2023 10:07, Maxime Coquelin wrote: > With LTS maintainers actually added... sorry. > > On 10/23/23 11:05, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >> >> >> On 10/19/23 14:12, Chautru, Nicolas wrote: >>> Hi Maxime, >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Maxime Coquelin >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 10:47 AM >>>> To: Chautru, Nicolas ; Vargas, Hernan >>>> ; dev@dpdk.org; gakhil@marvell.com; Rix, Tom >>>> >>>> Cc: Zhang, Qi Z >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for >>>> queue configure >>>> >>>> Hi Nicolas, >>>> >>>> On 10/19/23 10:41, Chautru, Nicolas wrote: >>>>> Hi Maxime, >>>>> >>>>> Do we really want to make these kind of changes on to the stable >>>>> release, it >>>> tends to artificially increase the amount of churn on the stable >>>> release which >>>> can be counterproductive for such changes which don't add much value >>>> if any >>>> to user/developper. >>>>> Happy to follow your suggestion but a general feedback is lack of >>>>> appetite for >>>> very large amount of changes in stable patches which inhibit >>>> adoption, so >>>> would expect to put things there that we would genuinely flag as a bug. >>>>> Kindly share your thoughts. >>>> >>>> Checking for configuration failure in a test application is quite >>>> useful in my >>>> opinion, as it can help catching regressions, isn't it? >>> >>> I don’t personally think this (or for other commit on that serie) hits >>> that bar for being required in stable release. This ends up being >>> counterproductive having stable release with a huge amount of commits >>> that are not really required, and it ends up being a reason for people >>> not to move to stable release. >>> But if you are really convinced, ok to follow your reco. >> >> Adding LTS maintainers if they want to step in. >> >> Personally, I think ot should be backported. >> We wrote the policy [0] with exactly this type of discussion in mind :-) "All patches accepted on the main branch with a Fixes: tag should be backported to the relevant stable/LTS branches, unless the submitter indicates otherwise. If there are exceptions, they will be discussed on the mailing lists." The idea behind the policy is to try and avoid spending time on subjective discussions about how bad the bug being fixed should be before it is backported, and to avoid different LTS maintainers making different judgements about the same fixes on different branches. So we try to keep it simple - if it's a bugfix, backport it. If there's a specific reason not too, fine. So if it's fixing something, please add the Fixes: tag and we'll take it from there into the LTS. thanks, Kevin. [0] http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/stable.html#what-changes-should-be-backported >> Maxime >> >>>> >>>> Maxime >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Nic >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Maxime Coquelin >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 9:43 PM >>>>>> To: Vargas, Hernan ; dev@dpdk.org; >>>>>> gakhil@marvell.com; Rix, Tom >>>>>> Cc: Chautru, Nicolas ; Zhang, Qi Z >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for >>>>>> queue configure >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/29/23 20:13, Hernan Vargas wrote: >>>>>>> Stop test if rte_bbdev_queue_configure fails to configure queue. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hernan Vargas >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>     app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c | 3 ++- >>>>>>>     1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c >>>>>>> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c index 65805977aead..cf224dca5d04 >>>>>>> 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c >>>>>>> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c >>>>>>> @@ -366,7 +366,8 @@ test_bbdev_configure_stop_queue(void) >>>>>>>          * - queue should be started if deferred_start == >>>>>>>          */ >>>>>>>         ts_params->qconf.deferred_start = 0; >>>>>>> -    rte_bbdev_queue_configure(dev_id, queue_id, &ts_params->qconf); >>>>>>> +    TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(rte_bbdev_queue_configure(dev_id, queue_id, >>>>>> &ts_params->qconf), >>>>>>> +            "Failed test for rte_bbdev_queue_configure"); >>>>>>>         rte_bbdev_start(dev_id); >>>>>>> >>>>>>>         TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(return_value = >>>>>> rte_bbdev_queue_info_get(dev_id, >>>>>> >>>>>> If should be a fix IMO. >>>>>> With fixes tag added and stable cc'ed: >>>>>> >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Maxime >>>>> >>> >