From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
To: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, dpdklab@iol.unh.edu, ci@dpdk.org,
Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com,
mb@smartsharesystems.com, roretzla@linux.microsoft.com,
aconole@redhat.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] service: split tests to perf and autotest to avoid spurious CI failures
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 17:08:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8yayLKk-w8sAAfm54dVJPFZvdmuX4OFQuhN7gmAKGPdhg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230224173637.243266-1-harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
Hello,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 7:04 PM Harry van Haaren
<harry.van.haaren@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On some CI runs, some service-cores tests spuriously fail as the
> service lcore thread is not actually scheduled by the OS in the
> given amount of time.
>
> Increasing timeouts has not resolved the issue in the CI, so the
> solution in this patch is to move them to a separate perf test
> suite.
>
> Signed-off-by: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
>
> ---
>
> See DPDK ML discussion in this thread:
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-February/263523.html
> ---
> app/test/meson.build | 1 +
> app/test/test_service_cores.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/meson.build b/app/test/meson.build
> index f34d19e3c3..2db5ccf4ff 100644
> --- a/app/test/meson.build
> +++ b/app/test/meson.build
> @@ -287,6 +287,7 @@ perf_test_names = [
> 'pie_perf',
> 'distributor_perf_autotest',
> 'pmd_perf_autotest',
> + 'service_perf_autotest',
> 'stack_perf_autotest',
> 'stack_lf_perf_autotest',
> 'rand_perf_autotest',
> diff --git a/app/test/test_service_cores.c b/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> index 637fcd7cf9..06653dfdef 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> @@ -1022,17 +1022,12 @@ static struct unit_test_suite service_tests = {
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_name),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_get_by_name),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_dump),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_attr_get),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_attr_get),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_probe_capability),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_start_stop),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_add_del),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_start_stop),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_en_dis_able),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_mt_unsafe_poll),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_mt_safe_poll),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_safe),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_unsafe),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_may_be_active),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_active_two_cores),
> TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
> @@ -1046,3 +1041,30 @@ test_service_common(void)
> }
>
> REGISTER_TEST_COMMAND(service_autotest, test_service_common);
> +
> +
> +/* The tests below have been split from the auto-test suite, as the
What is the auto-test suite?
Plus "as the when" reads strange.
In the end, I don't think it helps much to have this comment in the code.
The commitlog is supposed to tell the story, so I would simply remove
this comment.
> + * when they are run in a cloud CI environment they can give false-positive
> + * errors, due to the service-cores not being scheduled by the OS.
> + */
> +static struct unit_test_suite service_perf_tests = {
> + .suite_name = "service core test suite",
Maybe add "performance" in the name, so we have a uniquely named
testsuite object.
> + .setup = testsuite_setup,
> + .teardown = testsuite_teardown,
> + .unit_test_cases = {
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_attr_get),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_attr_get),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_start_stop),
Looking at service_lcore_running_check(), don't you think
service_may_be_active() and service_active_two_cores() are also
subject to race?
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_safe),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_unsafe),
> + TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
> + }
> +};
> +
> +static int
> +test_service_perf(void)
> +{
> + return unit_test_suite_runner(&service_perf_tests);
> +}
> +
> +REGISTER_TEST_COMMAND(service_perf_autotest, test_service_perf);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
David Marchand
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-27 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-24 17:36 Harry van Haaren
2023-02-27 16:08 ` David Marchand [this message]
2023-03-03 8:37 ` David Marchand
2023-03-03 10:59 ` Van Haaren, Harry
2023-03-07 13:48 ` David Marchand
2023-03-03 13:00 ` [PATCH v2] " Harry van Haaren
2023-03-07 13:48 ` David Marchand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJFAV8yayLKk-w8sAAfm54dVJPFZvdmuX4OFQuhN7gmAKGPdhg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=dpdklab@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
--cc=mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=roretzla@linux.microsoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).