Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] app/test: add allocator performance autotest

[Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@oss.nvidia.com>]

> This isn't really a test, imho.  There are no assert()s.  How does a developer who
> tries to fix a bug in this area know what is acceptable?
> 
> Please switch the printf()s to RTE_LOG calls, and add some RTE_TEST_ASSERT
> calls to enforce some time range at the least.
> Otherwise this test will not really be checking the performance - just giving a
> report somewhere.

I just followed DPDK naming convention of test_xxx_perf.c / xxx_perf_autotest.
They all should really be called benchmarks.
They help developers to see how the code changes affect performance.
I don't understand how this "perf test" is not in line with existing ones
and where it should properly reside.

I'm not totally opposed to replacing printf() with RTE_LOG(), but all other test use printf().
The drawback of the change is inconsistency, what is the benefit?

> Also, I don't understand the way the memset test works here.  You do one large
> memset at the very beginning and then extrapolate the time it would take.  Does
> that hold any value or should we do a memset in each iteration and enforce a
> scaled time?

As explained above, we don't need to enforce anything, we want a report.
I've never seen a case with one NUMA node where memset() time would not scale linearly,
but benchmarks should be precise so I'll change it to memset()'ing the allocated area, thanks.