From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22A6A034F;
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 18:32:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29CE0140EE9;
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 18:32:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-pj1-f52.google.com (mail-pj1-f52.google.com
[209.85.216.52])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1B31140EE2
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 18:32:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-pj1-f52.google.com with SMTP id s21so9801920pjq.1
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=EXH4HaLanFYJFoSSE5QktfLh/Uv+1erbzEgI0BI3q1s=;
b=JdXuL1O+oAztbhihqMrsCEJSqO7xzLmKJk7D99EDp1/ExGqXmvP9gKE/lLkMf0J99e
Y8Qul0nQS55owrvMqqxoyzqpWRXSEzlJyc+YuQ/Q5C4DG6WOZfVZED0E2K9bMk5z+BWy
0nLGu2PmJZeqvAsNvw25cSNPxPKL1uzNlA0ObX9TRDp77CNsWxrzAKj2DCRFs9x7ZlDK
r2OVMq0w1S3DxskgjOjOPAmMQD/QwpYCbXeRbrysfu3bnrPBPOCL0TsK3WmoWMBqXVEh
1QTt1WZGhW7J0GoX1Oy45Fpr+ZBUQynB0jlkKuOKcaxHIYafO544TVavUyAFodFBkRkD
ZXhw==
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:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=EXH4HaLanFYJFoSSE5QktfLh/Uv+1erbzEgI0BI3q1s=;
b=iyMxmt+zTpVDnGNVIBJUKK7yOM2RvaZ7Vb4XZOA0fgBn4svXEzSidyyBzmdRYS75r1
rvldcYr0nsQOND6TBtUdxsezacs7HC4jQCKWTPdhBsExXzDv4FE0eHBuqijsVB1eZsTC
rNsGyll84oIU2U7oizvdpfJUsGqUfkpnMC02THbIKmFfavN+bqKF9je7D7c98EuhaPm/
vem5BWpcnNopsnf8mNOGeKjP/7YBdaVGkqBgb9rXT9uQjzpiU2TpPkSF2Tij3Wten0lh
MM97ovEGUvv2v8zJyq00JvPmGILWHoOZXZZCbLk+vaWBpDr9T2hAHomTG6C68ZwK7c2J
xShA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532fRLKxEZnH7F+3MuGnfwDFor9d76IbJLDxpCS7sRVQEYwKOwvY
M6Ahq4j067LAOxkluhhT0ina4CjqkO5gtQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyutY64R3NhPkpizBbjGQJwfwsj3losfGBbTBtG4n5T2DOcPsthXpMhG5Ono03FYZ7fpEAfLw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:74c4:b029:e4:9e16:18d9 with SMTP id
f4-20020a17090274c4b02900e49e1618d9mr3967031plt.21.1617208331968;
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hermes.local (76-14-218-44.or.wavecable.com. [76.14.218.44])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s7sm2627779pjr.18.2021.03.31.09.32.11
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:32:08 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>
Message-ID: <20210331093208.22ec1ab6@hermes.local>
In-Reply-To: <DBAPR08MB58140373A280F616D0EE7253987C9@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20210212013838.312623-1-sthemmin@microsoft.com>
<20210330050047.34175-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
<DBAPR08MB58140373A280F616D0EE7253987C9@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] pflock: add phase-fair reader writer locks
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 04:19:14 +0000
Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> > +
> > + rte_pflock_write_lock(&sl);
> > + /* this message should be the last message of test */
> > + printf("Global write lock taken on main core %u\n", rte_lcore_id());
> > + rte_pflock_write_unlock(&sl);
> > +
> > + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> > +
> > + if (test_pflock_perf() < 0)
> Suggest separating out the performance test so that it is not run on the cloud CI platforms (which have issues with performance tests timing out). I think autotest_data.py needs to be modified.
I was just copying existing pattern of all lock tests (rwlock, mcslock. ticketlock).
They run the perf test as well.