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 59933A3168 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:54:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A17B1E910; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:54:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com (mail-wr1-f68.google.com [209.85.221.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58BF21E8FA for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:54:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id o18so26759525wrv.13 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:54:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=JJQ/ADI6lnCKdr4E08x3DegCyK7qGWG5W9s51y3v7H8=; b=VHWoSXhJrC1OMSTpK6UCGJnSKFv6gTlwAVzHuHhMPhIyemid63CC5TjJzUdiSUGu8j D3UENjMG6EQbT5tfLMbprNhEXGGz2Ev6s0sdF+MGKYtdxSfEQrHQ3tWUYP2LRIMX/tN+ lSUHTYtOdBKT7M6J6P2NoBzcm2BQ/nKCBA0Kd3K05w5SKukPGU9A0kYcBL+2ocMm/tik fmf+L0KyIS2JxzWI+ySdxPMVf/w0HfBZYX7MIQ9oAB/1O1BGsVnr8H/XFrh/DCd1gtXZ liDX2JVMSwLxIoa5NSLBqnG3V7VfhukPquUgOhT/mX7BoGmvtG9P4BQ8SRarms0oZey8 jpJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=JJQ/ADI6lnCKdr4E08x3DegCyK7qGWG5W9s51y3v7H8=; b=oocmHic5mEYFvPeT6mFwnn7HMKQEVEpEA/pXFZnqwuD/QoWdiTx0QMt3sjkrZ/VcCZ SpQOI+jAqGcdSbESO4OlE7LHwaE6YeiCFu8woMb2wT+f5ItnM0GLkBeYkkhqivuKp2nL BLQCAwhLk/8hvo45cMZE4GQpRz4t2Ch8RQiPGxPUB8VcB4ul047YrbuUkJvL4fz+efbq eiS+1KUaTLvWJZLIG1GJrcTGqLylaFuaCQTQ/XYbeucFus2aprwgpPSgATvSZGyvm57H VHpuj8qBXuttMqpTOPDB3VXRw2mosd9wB9fDPjArb/mHZP6ek9bs2dejtpllIvF02vDA bABA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV0jP2q1cNzZesdPTfKcUHwlezL18l6hcIRmlBGvZO1d4jZ4y4H GJ/V1bm0gKB7HMDRaTh21CAaTdTADls= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwQvlLEpmOSXrWzXzPf7q3N1Hkc1jhN/HtR0rdnd3aHvk8DWmjJrPhPMzBsi+vQHK+ufze2PA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e488:: with SMTP id i8mr1428053wrm.302.1571212474910; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com (2a01cb0c0005a6000226b0fffeed02fc.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb0c:5:a600:226:b0ff:feed:2fc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v6sm2304637wma.24.2019.10.16.00.54.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:54:33 +0200 From: Olivier Matz To: Morten =?utf-8?Q?Br=C3=B8rup?= Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, harry.van.haaren@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com Message-ID: <20191016075433.coyg3eghmj2h2ubi@platinum> References: <20191011121458.56388-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com> <20191011121458.56388-3-mb@smartsharesystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20191011121458.56388-3-mb@smartsharesystems.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/2] mbuf: add unit test for bulk alloc/free functions 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 Morten, On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:14:58PM +0000, Morten Brørup wrote: > Add unit test for functions for allocating and freeing a bulk of mbufs. > > Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup Few minor comments below. You can add my ack in the next version. > --- > app/test/test_mbuf.c | 171 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 171 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/app/test/test_mbuf.c b/app/test/test_mbuf.c > index 2a97afe20..fbce0ca7c 100644 > --- a/app/test/test_mbuf.c > +++ b/app/test/test_mbuf.c > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include > > #include > +#include > #include > #include > #include > @@ -545,6 +546,170 @@ test_pktmbuf_pool(struct rte_mempool *pktmbuf_pool) > return ret; > } > > +/* > + * test bulk allocation and bulk free of mbufs > + */ > +static int > +test_pktmbuf_pool_bulk(void) > +{ > + struct rte_mempool *pool = NULL; > + struct rte_mempool *pool2 = NULL; > + unsigned int i; > + struct rte_mbuf *m; > + struct rte_mbuf *mbufs[NB_MBUF]; > + int ret = 0; > + > + /* We cannot use the preallocated mbuf pools because their caches > + * prevent us from bulk allocating all objects in them. > + * So we create our own mbuf pools without caches. > + */ > + printf("Create mbuf pools for bulk allocation.\n"); > + pool = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create("test_pktmbuf_bulk", > + NB_MBUF, 0, 0, MBUF_DATA_SIZE, SOCKET_ID_ANY); > + if (pool == NULL) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_pool_create() failed. rte_errno %d\n", > + rte_errno); > + goto err; > + } > + pool2 = rte_pktmbuf_pool_create("test_pktmbuf_bulk2", > + NB_MBUF, 0, 0, MBUF_DATA_SIZE, SOCKET_ID_ANY); > + if (pool2 == NULL) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_pool_create() failed. rte_errno %d\n", > + rte_errno); > + goto err; > + } > + > + /* Preconditions: Mempools must be full. */ > + if (!(rte_mempool_full(pool) && rte_mempool_full(pool2))) { > + printf("Test precondition failed: mempools not full\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + if (!(rte_mempool_avail_count(pool) == NB_MBUF && > + rte_mempool_avail_count(pool2) == NB_MBUF)) { > + printf("Test precondition failed: mempools: %u+%u != %u+%u", > + rte_mempool_avail_count(pool), > + rte_mempool_avail_count(pool2), > + NB_MBUF, NB_MBUF); > + goto err; > + } > + > + printf("Test single bulk alloc, followed by multiple bulk free.\n"); > + > + /* Bulk allocate all mbufs in the pool, in one go. */ > + ret = rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk(pool, mbufs, NB_MBUF); > + if (ret != 0) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk() failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Test that they have been removed from the pool. */ > + if (!rte_mempool_empty(pool)) { > + printf("mempool not empty\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Bulk free all mbufs, in four steps. */ > + for (i = 0; i < NB_MBUF; i += NB_MBUF / 4) { Maybe add a RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(NB_MBUF % 4 == 0) > + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(&mbufs[i], NB_MBUF / 4); > + /* Test that they have been returned to the pool. */ > + if (rte_mempool_avail_count(pool) != i + NB_MBUF / 4) { > + printf("mempool avail count incorrect\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + } > + > + printf("Test multiple bulk alloc, followed by single bulk free.\n"); > + > + /* Bulk allocate all mbufs in the pool, in four steps. */ > + for (i = 0; i < NB_MBUF; i += NB_MBUF / 4) { > + ret = rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk(pool, &mbufs[i], NB_MBUF / 4); > + if (ret != 0) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk() failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto err; > + } > + } > + /* Test that they have been removed from the pool. */ > + if (!rte_mempool_empty(pool)) { > + printf("mempool not empty\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Bulk free all mbufs, in one go. */ > + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(mbufs, NB_MBUF); > + /* Test that they have been returned to the pool. */ > + if (!rte_mempool_full(pool)) { > + printf("mempool not full\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + > + printf("Test bulk free of single long chain.\n"); > + > + /* Bulk allocate all mbufs in the pool, in one go. */ > + ret = rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk(pool, mbufs, NB_MBUF); > + if (ret != 0) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_alloc_bulk() failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Create a long mbuf chain. */ > + for (i = 1; i < NB_MBUF; i++) { > + ret = rte_pktmbuf_chain(mbufs[0], mbufs[i]); > + if (ret != 0) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_chain() failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto err; > + } > + mbufs[i] = NULL; > + } > + /* Free the mbuf chain containing all the mbufs. */ > + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(mbufs, 1); > + /* Test that they have been returned to the pool. */ > + if (!rte_mempool_full(pool)) { > + printf("mempool not full\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + > + printf("Test bulk free of multiple chains using multiple pools.\n"); > + > + /* Create mbuf chains containing mbufs from different pools. */ > + for (i = 0; i < NB_MBUF * 2; i++) { > + m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc((i & 4) ? pool2 : pool); > + if (m == NULL) { > + printf("rte_pktmbuf_alloc() failed (%u)\n", i); > + goto err; > + } > + if ((i % 16) == 0) { > + mbufs[i / 16] = m; > + } else { > + rte_pktmbuf_chain(mbufs[i / 16], m); > + } > + } The 16 could be a #define CHAIN_LEN. Maybe another bug_on: RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(NB_MBUF % (CHAIN_LEN / 2) == 0) > + /* Test that both pools have been emptied. */ > + if (!(rte_mempool_empty(pool) && rte_mempool_empty(pool2))) { > + printf("mempools not empty\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Free one mbuf chain. */ > + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(mbufs, 1); > + /* Test that the segments have been returned to the pools. */ > + if (!(rte_mempool_avail_count(pool) == 8 && > + rte_mempool_avail_count(pool2) == 8)) { > + printf("all segments of first mbuf have not been returned\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + /* Free the remaining mbuf chains. */ > + rte_pktmbuf_free_bulk(&mbufs[1], NB_MBUF * 2 / 16 - 1); > + /* Test that they have been returned to the pools. */ > + if (!(rte_mempool_full(pool) && rte_mempool_full(pool2))) { > + printf("mempools not full\n"); > + goto err; > + } Use CHAIN_LEN in the code above. > + > + rte_mempool_free(pool); > + rte_mempool_free(pool2); > + return 0; > + > +err: > + rte_mempool_free(pool); > + rte_mempool_free(pool2); > + return -1; > +} > + > /* > * test that the pointer to the data on a packet mbuf is set properly > */ > @@ -1162,6 +1327,12 @@ test_mbuf(void) > goto err; > } > > + /* test bulk mbuf alloc and free */ > + if (test_pktmbuf_pool_bulk() < 0) { > + printf("test_pktmbuf_pool_bulk() failed\n"); > + goto err; > + } > + > /* test that the pointer to the data on a packet mbuf is set properly */ > if (test_pktmbuf_pool_ptr(pktmbuf_pool) < 0) { > printf("test_pktmbuf_pool_ptr() failed\n"); > -- > 2.17.1 > Thanks! Olivier