From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D879A0588; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:37:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FFDE1DADA; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:37:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUR02-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr00070.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.0.70]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3991D923 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:37:34 +0200 (CEST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=b58fr/CuomgAu+XX1OtFqsaRVFaBsIUNKWuSzXn9gCbKtwmsjqYuTDNdUt78JnppxkfmLEVcjOpg2yEPwzSGrhvKOWdvUoIzpD3m9opihqpzzNEiTKfUwF5+FM99AZ2Vzt3Ulvvgo13mT61FHUZ6hDpVBKxHib7+7HadnUYeVgqhF+tQkI3NOTA4iVUg625iQi3UxB5rIsuKQ20XGByxHH3W6GQKnhq7tIWb6mrJJIrQ4LTR6qKjNzE60VDskoKBlXH7/mDWUNKcDwPz+HumNRMIktmHfRUVzp3CpGdxfTFPAHrQSDYYxaHGxSkbYB8xxngoU2m73GSw4l7IQeCAGQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=XS2cOguvujsrI3t0BEziZdREuiqNvRfYUfmqDkro6MI=; b=ch5kdJXppwJejS6zPCvk7e1VzCrcHzK13N3LaYVUjptdSLANxBzKLRn761mdpbYfYX4yNZZMy6DNRndAjn8HG/CWXzmiIE5L46pJMjKj60e9ZPjuLWo/pVnPRMWvTdRs4oJiOTm3RvvZ8HAPbzOyz7UK+XApRJD6blMhoo9rr4SIM0SWfnxKMW82JBaottlhQCnOPyQXZP0RWDyrDTvPuB3mwTUY8IdrBNfhKzUz92d2n6bkREoTOg2Czq2++LQlpnVONGLjMiTn5epZ+3DOJl2UyF2nYVR/QG5V5c7S14OGha+JCqQFWnrz1ttUvS4nyhdQGhhwIQqWWLwICsfKlA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nxp.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nxp.com; dkim=pass header.d=nxp.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nxp.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=XS2cOguvujsrI3t0BEziZdREuiqNvRfYUfmqDkro6MI=; b=pTbLMuqJYICPfCd+TPjJNbz5QGXjNcZdKWQRIlNvW4EH87whmW04orkY1Xei/iHJDhdjd7GK45kcwCcs/CzqamGewRN+pyPT+nkr9dPLWZy/ofshMLpAIhmqkwr0TAjU2k9fJHLq9f2DggYpHR8YxjUg9Me8A3sf9ooDF/hOTPk= Received: from VI1PR04MB3168.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:802:6::10) by VI1PR04MB4893.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:803:5c::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2900.28; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:37:33 +0000 Received: from VI1PR04MB3168.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8c03:2f5:3b48:ba74]) by VI1PR04MB3168.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8c03:2f5:3b48:ba74%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2921.027; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:37:33 +0000 From: Akhil Goyal To: "Trahe, Fiona" , "Dybkowski, AdamX" , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Shally Verma Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2 2/2] test/compress: im buffer too small - add unit tests Thread-Index: AQHWDaRhlhVWnQmb702KIK9DOAfFGqh6jO/QgAEECoCAAAT/sIAAEpIAgAA0SrA= Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:37:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20200408125101.25764-1-adamx.dybkowski@intel.com> <20200408125101.25764-3-adamx.dybkowski@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-IN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=akhil.goyal@nxp.com; x-originating-ip: [45.118.166.74] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 008f4ed8-ee44-4ce7-ddbf-08d7e213b2ea x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR04MB4893: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-forefront-prvs: 0375972289 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:VI1PR04MB3168.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(396003)(366004)(346002)(136003)(66946007)(316002)(55016002)(4326008)(81156014)(71200400001)(110136005)(5660300002)(8936002)(8676002)(6506007)(186003)(52536014)(2906002)(478600001)(44832011)(7696005)(33656002)(26005)(66556008)(76116006)(64756008)(9686003)(66446008)(66476007)(86362001)(160913001)(15963001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nxp.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 5ziVw401MGkCk9DB9cxIlYxKZUQRdfuTf2Uh7ejdB/D3W9qgZ4RIbwIYiFGvJVXSuy4Z1Vjj3n4VVV9tc2c9nmH+eavcTK83eh0DApfwbC9s2bqASpPKwr1Rsgb87WAw09Tplyhjt6Yk3jOB9YLFzw== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: nxp.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 008f4ed8-ee44-4ce7-ddbf-08d7e213b2ea X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Apr 2020 14:37:32.9287 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 686ea1d3-bc2b-4c6f-a92c-d99c5c301635 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: OinMdz+sFlz1N1euGjv6vqOWSC47lJiFE60V/WwfnyLX22W75WVK7rX2UU+51UCiSj8V+fxmIzYkYL8iy97k8A== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR04MB4893 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/compress: im buffer too small - add unit tests X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" > > > > > > Hi Akhil, > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Fiona/Adam, > > > > > > > > > This patch adds a new test suite for verification of the "interna= l > > > > > QAT IM buffer too small" case handling. These unit tests are > > > > > specific to the QAT PMD only - that's why they are contained in > > > > > a separate test suite. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Dybkowski > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Why do we need to have separate testsuite for QAT? > > > > Can't we have a single one and based on capability of the driver, > > > > Determine which tests need to be skipped in case they are not suppo= rted. > > > > This would create a mess in the longer run just like cryptodev. > > > > > > > > Please fix this, we cannot take this patch as is. > > > > > > [Fiona] Yes, I understand your concern and we considered including in= the > main > > > suite. > > > However these tests are not based on something that can be > > > checked in capabilities. They are tests to hone in on a specific corn= er case > > > based on a QAT limitation in its intermediate buffer size. So some of= the > > > tests are to validate that the recent changes we made in the PMD corr= ectly > > > work around that limitation, but other tests are negative and expecte= d to fail > > > as provoking a corner-case that still exists. Other devices would pro= bably not > fail > > > the same tests. > > > > Does that mean that all PMDs will pass with the newly added testcase wh= ich is > for > > A corner case in QAT. If that is the case what is the issue in adding t= hat in the > main > > Test suite. It will get passed in all PMDs, isn't it? Am I missing some= thing? > > > > I believe we should not have PMD specific test suites, rather it should= be based > on > > Capabilities to identify the cases which should be run for that particu= lar PMD. > [Fiona] yes, several of the cases should pass on all PMDs. > So we could move those into the main suite. > But what to do about the negative tests? > Example: If a very large data buffer is passed to QAT to compress with dy= n > compression, it will get > split in the PMD into many smaller requests to the hardware. However if t= he > number > of requests is bigger than can fit on the qp then this will never succeed= . The test > validates that the PMD behaves appropriately in this expected error case.= That > same > case would probably not have an error on another device. Maybe we should = just > leave out > such negative tests, but I find them useful as they validate the known be= haviour. > The buffer size used in the test is based on the known size QAT can handl= e and > the > corner case in which QAT will return an error. >=20 > I see 4 options to handle this: > 1. Leave out those tests > 2. Use a qat-specific test suite only for negative cases which are constr= ucted > based on specific qat internal meta-data. > 3. Include the negative tests in the main suite, but only run them on QAT= (by > checking driver type) > 4. include the negative tests in the main suite, run them on all, expecti= ng a FAIL > from QAT and a PASS from other devices. >=20 > My preference is for 2. > But up to you. >=20 I would say 4 is better. And why do you say negative cases will fail on QAT= and pass on all other. The test cases are to test the library APIs which are same for all the PMDs= and the behavior should Be same.