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 C48B0A2EEB for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:13:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F5B1E87C; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:13:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D821E56F for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:13:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Sep 2019 10:13:15 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,494,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="209733616" Received: from orsmsx110.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.240.8]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Sep 2019 10:13:14 -0700 Received: from orsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.123]) by ORSMSX110.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.57]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 10:13:14 -0700 From: "Wang, Yipeng1" To: "agupta3@marvell.com" , "Gobriel, Sameh" , Dharmik Thakkar , "ruifeng.wang@arm.com" , "honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [PATCH 2/2] test/meson: hash lf test moved to dpdk perf testsuite Thread-Index: AQHVZHb4dKHB3rJgDEuj5v5ZHJG4Xqcmvfcg Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 17:13:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1567748973-24192-1-git-send-email-agupta3@marvell.com> <1567748973-24192-3-git-send-email-agupta3@marvell.com> In-Reply-To: <1567748973-24192-3-git-send-email-agupta3@marvell.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.2.0.6 dlp-reaction: no-action x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNzg5MGVmMGYtNGVjZC00YzM0LThlMWMtMjA1MjBhMjhiZjAwIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiNFRIQUtrR1N4MnFZTUlqQmVBTzNhOURobzlrNzZ4cUF2WE9nXC9SOVwvYktaNlBEcWl0VG5rUG0ySGdRXC8wUmV2byJ9 x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.139] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] test/meson: hash lf test moved to dpdk perf testsuite 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" >-----Original Message----- >From: agupta3@marvell.com [mailto:agupta3@marvell.com] >Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 10:50 PM >To: Wang, Yipeng1 ; Gobriel, Sameh ; Richardson, Bruce >; De Lara Guarch, Pablo >Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Amit Gupta >Subject: [PATCH 2/2] test/meson: hash lf test moved to dpdk perf testsuite > >From: Amit Gupta > >hash_readwrite_lf test always getting TIMEOUT as required >time to finish this test was much longer compare to time >required for fast tests(10s). Hence, the test is being >moved to perf test category for its execution to complete. > >Signed-off-by: Amit Gupta >--- > app/test/meson.build | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >diff --git a/app/test/meson.build b/app/test/meson.build >index 94fd9f8..34141c5 100644 >--- a/app/test/meson.build >+++ b/app/test/meson.build >@@ -220,7 +220,6 @@ fast_test_names =3D [ > 'eventdev_common_autotest', > 'fbarray_autotest', > 'hash_readwrite_func_autotest', >- 'hash_readwrite_lf_autotest', > 'ipsec_autotest', > 'kni_autotest', > 'kvargs_autotest', >@@ -263,6 +262,7 @@ perf_test_names =3D [ > 'stack_lf_perf_autotest', > 'rand_perf_autotest', > 'hash_readwrite_perf_autotest', >+ 'hash_readwrite_lf_autotest', > ] > > driver_test_names =3D [ >-- >1.8.3.1 [Wang, Yipeng]=20 I believe the lf_autotest includes functional test as well which is critica= l for testing the lock free implementation on non-TSO machine. Do you think it is possible to also separate this test? I also include the ARM folks for opinions. Thanks! Yipeng