From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE3CA0096 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:25:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F3E15F36; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:25:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A8F5F19 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:25:00 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Apr 2019 06:24:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,332,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="159925873" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.35]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2019 06:24:57 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:24:56 +0100 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:24:56 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Aaron Conole Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Jerin Jacob , Gavin Hu , Michael Santana Message-ID: <20190410132456.GB718@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20190408182420.4398-1-aconole@redhat.com> <20190408182420.4398-4-aconole@redhat.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580148A94A44@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580148A94D87@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772580148A94DA8@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] acl: adjust the 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" Message-ID: <20190410132456.STjBIdiR8U2ik1RuzrqQuXsdDsOoRI5ywodInBtW-eo@z> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 09:10:25AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > "Ananyev, Konstantin" writes: > > >> > >> > > Hi Aaron, > >> > > > >> > >> > >> > >> This makes the tests pass, and also ensures that on platforms where the > >> > >> testing is supported, we can properly test the implementation specific > >> > >> code. One edge case is when we run on x86_64 systems that don't support > >> > >> AVX2, but where the compiler can generate such instructions. That could > >> > >> be an enhancement in the future, but for now at least the tests will > >> > >> pass. > >> > >> > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole > >> > >> --- > >> > >> app/test/test_acl.c | 62 +++++++++++++-------------------- > >> > >> lib/librte_acl/Makefile | 1 + > >> > >> lib/librte_acl/acl_run_notsup.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > >> lib/librte_acl/meson.build | 4 +-- > >> > >> 4 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > >> > >> create mode 100644 lib/librte_acl/acl_run_notsup.c > >> > >> > >> > >> diff --git a/app/test/test_acl.c b/app/test/test_acl.c > >> > >> index b1f75d1bc..c44faa251 100644 > >> > >> --- a/app/test/test_acl.c > >> > >> +++ b/app/test/test_acl.c > >> > >> @@ -408,6 +408,9 @@ test_classify(void) > >> > >> return -1; > >> > >> } > >> > >> > >> > >> + /* Always use the scalar testing for now. */ > >> > >> + rte_acl_set_ctx_classify(acx, RTE_ACL_CLASSIFY_SCALAR); > >> > >> + > >> > >> ret = 0; > >> > >> for (i = 0; i != TEST_CLASSIFY_ITER; i++) { > >> > >> > >> > >> @@ -547,6 +550,7 @@ test_build_ports_range(void) > >> > >> for (i = 0; i != RTE_DIM(test_data); i++) > >> > >> data[i] = (uint8_t *)&test_data[i]; > >> > >> > >> > >> + rte_acl_set_ctx_classify(acx, RTE_ACL_CLASSIFY_SCALAR); > >> > >> for (i = 0; i != RTE_DIM(test_rules); i++) { > >> > >> rte_acl_reset(acx); > >> > >> ret = test_classify_buid(acx, test_rules, i + 1); > >> > >> @@ -911,6 +915,8 @@ test_convert_rules(const char *desc, > >> > >> return -1; > >> > >> } > >> > >> > >> > >> + rte_acl_set_ctx_classify(acx, RTE_ACL_CLASSIFY_SCALAR); > >> > >> + > >> > > > >> > > As I understand here and above, on x86 you replaced default algo (SSE, AVX2) > >> > > with scalar one, right? > >> > > That looks like reduction of test coverage for x86. > >> > > >> > In one way, you're right. However, the tests weren't testing what they > >> > purported anyway. > >> > >> Could you explain a bit more here? > >> What I am seeing: tests were running bot sse(or avx2) and scalar classify() method. > >> Now they always running scalar only. > >> To me it definitely looks like reduction in coverage. > >> > >> > Actually, it's just a shift I think (previously, it > >> > would have tested the AVX2 but I don't see AVX2 having a fallback into > >> > the SSE code - unlike the SSE code falling back into scalar). > >> > >> Not sure I understand you here. > >> What fallback for AVX2 you expect that you think is missing? > >> > >> > > >> > The tests were failing for a number of reasons when built with meson, > >> > >> Ok, but with legacy build system (make) on x86 all tests passes, right? > >> So the problem is in new build system, not in the test itself. > >> Why we should compromise our test coverage to make it work with > >> new tools? > >> That just hides the problem without fixing it. > >> Instead I think the build system needs to be fixed. > >> Looking at it a bit closely, for .so meson+ninja generates code with > >> correct version of the function: > >> > >> nm x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc-meson/lib/librte_acl.so.2 | grep acl_classify_sse > >> 000000000000fa50 t rte_acl_classify_sse > >> > >> So for 'meson -Ddefault_library=shared' > >> acl_autotest passes without the problem. > >> > >> Though for static lib we have both: > >> nm x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc-meson/lib/librte_acl.a | grep acl_classify_sse > >> 0000000000000000 W rte_acl_classify_sse > >> 0000000000004880 T rte_acl_classify_sse > >> > >> And then linker pickups the wrong one: > >> nm x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc-meson/app/test/dpdk-test | grep acl_classify_sse > >> 00000000005f6100 W rte_acl_classify_sse > >> > >> While for make: > >> $ nm x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc-aesmb/lib/librte_acl.a | grep acl_classify_sse > >> 0000000000000000 W rte_acl_classify_sse > >> 0000000000004880 T rte_acl_classify_sse > >> $ nm x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc-aesmb/app/test | grep acl_classify_sse > >> 0000000000240440 T rte_acl_classify_sse > >> > >> Linker pickups the right one. > > > > And the changes below make linker to pick-up the proper version of the function > > and make acl_autotest to pass for static build too. > > > > diff --git a/app/test/meson.build b/app/test/meson.build > > index 867cc5863..4364be932 100644 > > --- a/app/test/meson.build > > +++ b/app/test/meson.build > > @@ -328,6 +328,7 @@ test_dep_objs += cc.find_library('execinfo', required: false) > > link_libs = [] > > if get_option('default_library') == 'static' > > link_libs = dpdk_drivers > > + link_libs += dpdk_static_libraries > > endif > > > > if get_option('tests') > > diff --git a/meson.build b/meson.build > > index a96486597..df1e1c41c 100644 > > --- a/meson.build > > +++ b/meson.build > > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ configure_file(output: build_cfg, > > # for static builds, include the drivers as libs and we need to "whole-archive" > > # them. > > dpdk_drivers = ['-Wl,--whole-archive'] + dpdk_drivers + ['-Wl,--no-whole-archive'] > > +dpdk_static_libraries = ['-Wl,--whole-archive'] + dpdk_static_libraries + ['-Wl,--no-whole-archive'] > > > > Not saying that's the proper patch, but just to prove that linking librte_acl.a > > with '--whole-archive' does fix the problem. > > Bruce, could you point is the best way to fix things here > > (my meson knowledge is very limited)? > > Do we need extra container here as 'whole_archive_static_libraries[]' or so? > > Thanks > > Konstantin > > Okay - I'll look at this part more. I think I went down the path of > explicitly setting these because the comments didn't match with what was > occuring (for example, in the section that I changed that loops through > all versions, only the AVX2 and Scalar were being tested on my system, > while the comment implied SSE). > > I also believe that I split out the functions because of the linking > issue (I guess the way the linker resolves the functions works properly > when the weak versions are in a different translation unit)? I'll spend > some time trying to get it working in a different way. > > Regardless, this wasn't ready for posting as 'PATCH' - I meant it as > RFC. I don't intend to change the first two patches, though. > > And thank you for the all the feedback! > I've dug into this a bit, and I'm doing up a patch to remove the use of weak symbols in our libraries (note, just libs, not drivers) entirely. That's fairly easy to do, and not a big change, but should make this problem go away. /Bruce