From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EFDB46407; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:30:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16133402D1; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:30:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719CB402BB for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:30:25 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1742221824; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EJcLDWsMYIkvG+V03KXZb2miZS7VVGDIBgIheB4Vdck=; b=A4mhTVAWlfdLP15BWUYaVHHzvtROMYLcJlx14NypBh+AMqtwBd1Mosc2LUcxVDABMw0phV cdjW8akYcz3l0elcWWjhdx4/Zj2c8SaO9yWxg4LUUqQpcPc/tDn2YrcZrcE05USYnSCMTJ 8A5RtgM6DEecbnqqUCDl9ZcqaHbaQCQ= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-674-z0LbQM4TMkyv5Xu0_EEkZQ-1; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:30:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: z0LbQM4TMkyv5Xu0_EEkZQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: z0LbQM4TMkyv5Xu0_EEkZQ_1742221822 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15E531800267; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:30:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dmarchan.lan (unknown [10.44.34.22]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC6A3001D12; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:30:19 +0000 (UTC) From: David Marchand To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: stable@dpdk.org, Tyler Retzlaff Subject: [PATCH] test: fix race in per lcore test Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:30:15 +0100 Message-ID: <20250317143015.2559854-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: M4XCMy2UHVEU2dnIcDH4fe9HQcVYVAsaJtyXGdfgtJc_1742221822 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; x-default=true X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org In some CI, this unit test can fail, as the main thread may get rescheduled while lcores execute the callback waiting 100ms. Bugzilla ID: 1668 Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release") Cc: stable@dpdk.org Signed-off-by: David Marchand --- app/test/test_per_lcore.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/app/test/test_per_lcore.c b/app/test/test_per_lcore.c index 63c5c80c24..9c72f0fa21 100644 --- a/app/test/test_per_lcore.c +++ b/app/test/test_per_lcore.c @@ -59,17 +59,29 @@ display_vars(__rte_unused void *arg) } static int -test_per_lcore_delay(__rte_unused void *arg) +test_per_lcore_delay(void *arg) { + RTE_ATOMIC(bool) *wait; + rte_delay_ms(100); printf("wait 100ms on lcore %u\n", rte_lcore_id()); + if (arg == NULL) + return 0; + + wait = arg; + while (rte_atomic_load_explicit(wait, rte_memory_order_relaxed)) { + rte_delay_ms(100); + printf("wait 100ms on lcore %u\n", rte_lcore_id()); + } + return 0; } static int test_per_lcore(void) { + RTE_ATOMIC(bool) wait = true; unsigned lcore_id; int ret; @@ -86,7 +98,7 @@ test_per_lcore(void) } /* test if it could do remote launch twice at the same time or not */ - ret = rte_eal_mp_remote_launch(test_per_lcore_delay, NULL, SKIP_MAIN); + ret = rte_eal_mp_remote_launch(test_per_lcore_delay, &wait, SKIP_MAIN); if (ret < 0) { printf("It fails to do remote launch but it should able to do\n"); return -1; @@ -97,6 +109,7 @@ test_per_lcore(void) printf("It does remote launch successfully but it should not at this time\n"); return -1; } + rte_atomic_store_explicit(&wait, false, rte_memory_order_relaxed); RTE_LCORE_FOREACH_WORKER(lcore_id) { if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(lcore_id) < 0) return -1; -- 2.48.1