From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (mail-pd0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D14505A76 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 23:07:50 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id y13so13959765pdi.8 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:07:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=FUDLbIMER13uu9KRZ7x6xAeQvTHOufnhEiHb8QEv0os=; b=MJKDObvF4HcxouvZxtInOelp1nRKl1Rc2f+3ymCfHQTNzqZZPylUXhx4l4xTLa+a3h gM8aWy0ujus47rOpVjZ7+K+A07rGtC9OmNZDigzML+FP4lYpwalMveAjg98t5JExci9g khh7ZHfW+H/FZcdT4LX1xyeFG4254VaiEX/LTScG0wweUzgLvXES7jcUVUQfhIvXS6Us twDV9YXH0T4ODJwQNLWvSC6jjKwB7eEguPse58uKFL8Sve3e7A475n+tBIFYqMpk+rZ/ j4oIAC7S0rIOCSsuuyzxN2V8OB5Dh92S87quhIjTS8DYMKv352rvmLWZ1bYQgRbGpirD dlCw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.156.229 with SMTP id wh5mr47985753pab.119.1421705270006; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:07:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.91.166 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:07:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1419694115-1892-1-git-send-email-rkerur@gmail.com> <7022282.sJULtgJP1R@xps13> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:07:49 -0800 Message-ID: From: Ravi Kerur To: Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] Fix rte_is_power_of_2 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 22:07:51 -0000 Looks like "make test" was added recently? I have "1.8.0" version and when I run "make test" after "make install T=x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc" I get following errors root@user-PC:/home/rkerur/dpdk-new-5/dpdk# make test No test found, please do a 'make build' first, or specify O= root@user-PC:/home/rkerur/dpdk-new-5/dpdk# However, When I pull latest code (as of 1/19) and follow same steps as above I see "make test" runs fine but there are 19 failures as shown below. Any other prerequisites needed for this test to run successfully. If it is documented and can be shared, it will really help new contributors to not make same mistake I did. root@user-PC:/home/rkerur/dpdk-new-6/dpdk# make test /home/rkerur/dpdk-new-6/dpdk/build/app/test -c f -n 4 Test name Test result Test Total ================================================================================ Start group_1: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Timer autotest: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Debug autotest: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Errno autotest: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Meter autotest: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Common autotest: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Dump log history: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Dump rings: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] Dump mempools: Fail [No prompt] [00m 00s] [00m 00s] Start group_2: Success [00m 00s] Memory autotest: Success [00m 00s] Read/write lock autotest: Success [00m 00s] Logs autotest: Success [00m 00s] CPU flags autotest: Success [00m 00s] Version autotest: Success [00m 00s] EAL filesystem autotest: Success [00m 00s] EAL flags autotest: Fail [00m 09s] Hash autotest: Success [00m 00s] [00m 12s] Start group_3: Success [00m 00s] LPM autotest: Success [00m 23s] IVSHMEM autotest: Fail [Not found] [00m 00s] Memcpy autotest: Success [00m 00s] Memzone autotest: Success [00m 00s] String autotest: Success [00m 00s] Alarm autotest: Success [00m 16s] [00m 54s] Start group_4: Success [00m 00s] PCI autotest: Fail [00m 00s] Malloc autotest: Success [00m 00s] Multi-process autotest: Fail [00m 01s] Mbuf autotest: Success [00m 27s] Per-lcore autotest: Success [00m 05s] Ring autotest: Success [00m 02s] [01m 31s] Start group_5: Success [00m 00s] Spinlock autotest: Success [00m 15s] Byte order autotest: Success [00m 00s] TAILQ autotest: Success [00m 00s] Command-line autotest: Fail [00m 00s] Interrupts autotest: Success [00m 11s] [01m 59s] Start group_6: Success [00m 00s] Function reentrancy autotest: Success [00m 00s] Mempool autotest: Fail [00m 00s] Atomics autotest: Success [00m 00s] Prefetch autotest: Success [00m 00s] Red autotest: Success [01m 40s] [03m 40s] Start group_7: Success [00m 00s] PMD ring autotest: Fail [00m 00s] Access list control autotest: Success [00m 00s] Sched autotest: Success [00m 00s] [03m 42s] Start kni: Success [00m 00s] KNI autotest: Fail [Crash] [00m 00s] [03m 43s] Start mempool_perf: Success [00m 00s] Cycles autotest: Success [00m 01s] Mempool performance autotest: Fail [00m 00s] [03m 45s] Start memcpy_perf: Success [00m 00s] Memcpy performance autotest: Success [00m 50s] [04m 37s] Start hash_perf: Success [00m 00s] Hash performance autotest: Success [01m 05s] [05m 43s] Start power: Success [00m 00s] Power autotest: Success [00m 00s] [05m 44s] Start power_acpi_cpufreq: Success [00m 00s] Power ACPI cpufreq autotest: Success [00m 00s] [05m 45s] Start power_kvm_vm: Success [00m 00s] Power KVM VM autotest: Fail [00m 00s] [05m 46s] Start lpm6: Success [00m 00s] LPM6 autotest: Fail [00m 00s] [05m 47s] Start timer_perf: Success [00m 00s] Timer performance autotest: Success [00m 11s] [05m 59s] Start ring_perf: Success [00m 00s] Ring performance autotest: Success [00m 04s] [06m 04s] ================================================================================ Total run time: 06m 04s Number of failed tests: 19 On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Ravi Kerur wrote: > Sorry for the inconvenience. I was not aware of "make test" utility which > does more elaborate testing. I will make a note of it and make sure future > patches will go through it. I had done basic testing with testpmd as the > changes were minimal. > > Thanks, > Ravi > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Thomas Monjalon < > thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote: > >> 2015-01-19 08:21, David Marchand: >> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 3:45 AM, Zhang, Helin >> wrote: >> > >> > > It seems that your fix result in cannot launching applications. >> > > I don't suspect the correction of your fix, but somewhere else needs >> to be >> > > corrected together with your fix. >> > > >> > > Logs: >> > > /************************************************************ >> > > RING: Cannot reserve memory for tailq >> > >> > I have a quick fix for this one (rte_malloc_socket refuses 0 alignment), >> > but looking at the change, I would say there are a lot of places to be >> > checked. >> > Were those places checked during review ? >> >> http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=2fc8d6daa4c7a >> This case demonstrates that an Acked-by line is not always sufficient >> to apply a patch. >> >> > Kerur, did you run a make test ? >> > All tests fail for me because of rte_malloc_socket. >> >> My dream would be to have a machine receiving patches, applying them in a >> sandbox, >> run some basic tests and reports failures. >> >> It should be fixed now: >> http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=8e3e06501660 >> >> -- >> Thomas >> > >