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 168E94307F; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:40:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0311410D0; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:40:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3769640EF0 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:40:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1692186055; 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=qEsyMOa4vla6xeSgb/ar8EIT9IXDcXzXkzgsonK8W1Q=; b=XdPOv7k0OC3OvuXZABDH/e54XK30EKvFH9n7iG1quLIXxFD+c/+TVOEMoFOq5DgmBkHUSX 4HsjN06WmfG+RcDxL3+cNEbOtxkfPPqBIi9FOTTrdpzAq6SvfjPy5EZ9ZJFpJdFszrcrwo wKyt8J5HoKjCclNhtgOMjlLQVanVx9M= Received: from mail-lf1-f71.google.com (mail-lf1-f71.google.com [209.85.167.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-297-WYrC-x_SOkC19EPM6m4Jyg-1; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 07:40:54 -0400 X-MC-Unique: WYrC-x_SOkC19EPM6m4Jyg-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f71.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-4fe0800f960so6431829e87.0 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:40:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692186053; x=1692790853; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qEsyMOa4vla6xeSgb/ar8EIT9IXDcXzXkzgsonK8W1Q=; b=FWOm/2Vf/KAHSuKU6epnfPR5qF78dmUtIlQox4eYKNOYMQu3xYgNiZHNaBQ5zvFVyJ UiactxvCeySzFlGkYvEsuhl3JW5sCiKjkzojPX7wDtMiFH0Wfb3zJJ5cS8iojxC9x2pe CYU7fvq9HIH7Tq8LXOGMjsSch9KC7M8XiU5VqKqGjp2llwY8H8J1hqT1xYyipBZb9+Mi kzLtbZdIjqX/rsm03SwxczGiB2ACZnfK+0HLLw4cAGL1ZCZZlTHvd9h43qfmJ7apapbv Qs4nmeNffYC4q/5G5PJJeerhz0je3tiBth8zACooLj7Y9kQ3G0/B0ecoPCAMcvqawQMM MXig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwD6rE1bQQBy2Imi/OnNx+kffSiuJ8ZxWpjtCqHBSq+ZHGnuGv3 6NL147iNT+FlaEEuGyr/mWEgNKzT3ig4uVvI9FCkKLOg7+X9LouMI5t3rojexDD7YacKuAzriUa N4HZTumxGYWZyeWsxTBo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:39cd:b0:4fd:ddbc:1577 with SMTP id k13-20020a05651239cd00b004fdddbc1577mr1801150lfu.2.1692186052964; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:40:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHMN9f1FavZXKX8wbc2xYmyBTRGNBUVnIC4wrRjlaJNFBFmf1Pm9H1D/kYPSf3jEDx8y7ovNVkDI2jXJ6SvKtY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:39cd:b0:4fd:ddbc:1577 with SMTP id k13-20020a05651239cd00b004fdddbc1577mr1801134lfu.2.1692186052679; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 04:40:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230721115125.55137-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20230815151053.996469-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20230815151053.996469-6-bruce.richardson@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:40:41 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/10] app/test: define unit tests suites based on test macros To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ci@dpdk.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=C3=B8rup?= , Olivier Matz X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 1:15=E2=80=AFPM David Marchand wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 1:02=E2=80=AFPM Bruce Richardson > wrote: > > These lines here seem to be exposing a bug in the mempool unit tests fo= r > > shared builds, which is why we have a CI failure. > > > > The mempool unit tests use the mempool "create_empty" API, and then cal= l > > the populate APIs to finish setting up the mempool. However, the > > create_empty API does not explicitly configure a particular set of memp= ool > > ops for the new mempool, leaving the ops field at 0. This means that un= less > > the app explicitly sets other ops, the mempool will use the ops from > > whatever driver registers itself first. This occurs even when the drive= r is > > unsuitable, e.g. on my Intel system, the dpaa2 is first on the list, > > leading to failures in setting up and using the mempool. > > Hum, it sounds like a bug to me. > The dpaa2 driver should not be registered as the default (or here, > default platform) mempool. > Other mempool drivers ensure that required hw is available, I guess > dpaa2 is missing some check. Ok, re-reading your last comment, I agree it looks like an issue in the unit test itself. Copying Olivier. --=20 David Marchand