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 55E9AA0C44; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:34:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB9071410F6; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:34:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954DF1410F3 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:34:06 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1618227245; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=UuKIr4W925zboiKkG54rgmDJJdu56KpLQHRDEPJYNkk=; b=eu3EBRkzPrbwCNKbTnyy5wVkycGXCV7Aj/Cb5BLkartzt+jXTxRBiOfqQ7xe3RZV86cEv6 dc8TLvKvWXE0f+809a0wUf9o5/3S14JQyhcddkr3d9Q4xkvGWKhLIkNoHA48NTEm7LbRsp eNbqP0pCWZNSaGPdNChgKn6ANjE1ynI= Received: from mail-ua1-f71.google.com (mail-ua1-f71.google.com [209.85.222.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-191-N_aBmml4Npa1uSUL90d77Q-1; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 07:34:03 -0400 X-MC-Unique: N_aBmml4Npa1uSUL90d77Q-1 Received: by mail-ua1-f71.google.com with SMTP id h13so710068uaj.6 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 04:34:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UuKIr4W925zboiKkG54rgmDJJdu56KpLQHRDEPJYNkk=; b=QfpsxL7YNeHks5uoE3p5v/RgI3UT6SoqU7lPFkE14yEv1z6RYbxQTqtqLKIModl9Yq fDmYd1HhOLTB9BeQLukLwMydhNXe9FA0vVSiASqHZAsnYNqFMdExc2NIcNylAF8XymZV Uo3eqh4ZmxKYbi8G9GTE9MlPbYyP807XFBW8vDAQpJhHWeBWP/z+rak3wL9zYvkmvo7I F70CoPjQURqz6rapTIKMbtLMa9RQptelZRp64rV7tK/qb3gUcCLSDF02GIEPM/MAQnQJ 9PMfiRgpVwifdGwIukb1kJyDa1iogwoia9lxifpw46zvHWUDh6IQY4kmh/T5x29TwEal ImMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Epb/Pq0enPiUPIQMtUtnZTVfCLq9kw2f+Vvr+x+Do+QpUgnhw XfBQ5wcdmNO+CzdgqA3TCIMNVxpPW8RGu+st1RK+0ZG0Kycqgimudh+Tgk5h90rEbVT9PG9Q7cA MDNdcLVXlJAD40+z6xL8= X-Received: by 2002:a67:e317:: with SMTP id j23mr2255901vsf.17.1618227242547; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 04:34:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxdBcVPacJUlHQ+GeYHnskB7Z6MU+Az57lKsPpZgRyYf0bt99FSP81seyOEkjVVt5Dhk5WpGJXSWTRfgt1LYyQ= X-Received: by 2002:a67:e317:: with SMTP id j23mr2255885vsf.17.1618227242205; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 04:34:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210317144409.288346-1-aconole@redhat.com> <20210406145041.GC551@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <5237468.PbloVLfHjj@thomas> In-Reply-To: <5237468.PbloVLfHjj@thomas> From: David Marchand Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:33:50 +0200 Message-ID: To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Aaron Conole , Bruce Richardson , dev , "Burakov, Anatoly" Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test: make hugepage check more robust under Linux 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 Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 5:33 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > This seems to me like the test binary itself should be checking the > > > presence of hugepages, and reporting skips if necessary. It's not just when > > > run through ninja that this functionality would be useful. > > > > Either way, there needs to be a rework - if we do it in the test binary, > > then the tests that require hugepages need to be worked so that they > > correctly detect lack of hugepage support before starting. If we keep > > that knowledge in the meson system, then we need to change the way we > > call the test binary script to support a more robust detection. > > > > I guess, I don't care too much which one is the one we choose. My $.02 > > opinion is that we already have most of the logic and whatnot done in > > the build system, so I'd prefer to do as small a change as possible > > (leaving that logic in the meson system). Then again, maybe it makes > > more sense to just rip the bandaid off and move it all into the test > > framework. > > > > WDYT? > > I think the test application should adapt to its environment. > If no hugepage, then mark the tests requiring hugepages as skipped. > For the other tests, we could use --in-memory. There are tests that rely/test mp. They would have to be identified and skipped if we want to go with --in-memory. -- David Marchand