Re: [dpdk-dev] Random failure in service_autotest

[Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>]

<snip>

> Subject: Re: Random failure in service_autotest
> 
> David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 3:09 PM Lukasz Wojciechowski
> > <l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> W dniu 15.07.2020 o 15:02, David Marchand pisze:
> >> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 2:56 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> I guess the service_lcore_attr_get failed, but with no useful
> >> Why do you suspect service_lcore_attr_get() ?
> >
> > https://travis-ci.com/github/ovsrobot/dpdk/jobs/361097992#L18697
> >
> > RTE>>service_autotest
> >  + ------------------------------------------------------- +  + Test
> > Suite : service core test suite  +
> > ------------------------------------------------------- +  + TestCase
> > [ 0] : unregister_all succeeded  + TestCase [ 1] : service_name
> > succeeded  + TestCase [ 2] : service_get_by_name succeeded Service
> > dummy_service Summary
> >   dummy_service: stats 1 calls 0 cycles 0 avg: 0 Service dummy_service
> > Summary
> >   dummy_service: stats 0 calls 0 cycles 0 avg: 0  + TestCase [ 3] :
> > service_dump succeeded  + TestCase [ 4] : service_attr_get succeeded
> >
> > ***
> >  + TestCase [ 5] : service_lcore_attr_get failed
> > ***
> >
> >  + TestCase [ 6] : service_probe_capability succeeded  + TestCase [ 7]
> > : service_start_stop succeeded  + TestCase [ 8] :
> > service_lcore_add_del skipped  + TestCase [ 9] :
> > service_lcore_start_stop succeeded  + TestCase [10] :
> > service_lcore_en_dis_able succeeded  + TestCase [11] :
> > service_mt_unsafe_poll skipped  + TestCase [12] : service_mt_safe_poll
> > skipped perf test for MT Safe: 56.9 cycles per call  + TestCase [13] :
> > service_app_lcore_mt_safe succeeded perf test for MT Unsafe: 83.4
> > cycles per call  + TestCase [14] : service_app_lcore_mt_unsafe
> > succeeded  + TestCase [15] : service_may_be_active succeeded  +
> > TestCase [16] : service_active_two_cores skipped  +
> > ------------------------------------------------------- +
> >
> >
> >> >> information.  We should have the test suite app turn the log level
> >> >> all the way up.  I realize it will increase the log data even
> >> >> higher, but without it, we have no idea why this test failed.
> >> >>
> >> >> Something like the following
> >> >> ---
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/app/test/test.c b/app/test/test.c index
> >> >> 94d26ab1f6..c47cb075f9 100644
> >> >> --- a/app/test/test.c
> >> >> +++ b/app/test/test.c
> >> >> @@ -150,6 +150,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> >> >>
> >> >>          prgname = argv[0];
> >> >>
> >> >> +       rte_log_set_global_level(RTE_LOG_DEBUG);
> >> >> +       rte_log_set_level(RTE_LOGTYPE_EAL, RTE_LOG_DEBUG);
> >> >> +
> >> >>          recursive_call = getenv(RECURSIVE_ENV_VAR);
> >> >>          if (recursive_call != NULL) {
> >> >>                  ret = do_recursive_call();
> >> >> ---
> >> >>
> >> >> That way we can at least debug when it happens.
> >> > Debugging is one thing.
> >> > But here service_lcore_attr_get() has a lot of asserts that should
> >> > trigger a straight error.
> >> >
> >> Yes, but without debugs enabled, the assert message won't be printed out.
> >
> > Changing the whole debug levels could have side effects on the
> > libraries being tested: maybe hide races (too bad) or reveal races
> > (that would be interesting ;-)).
> 
> 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other.
> 
> Maybe there are bugs where people run code inside log level tests that get
> omitted otherwise.
> 
> > On the other hand, what I am saying is that using debug level logs for
> > test asserts might not be the best solution.
Agree, at least error level is required.
Please check: https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/74134/

> 
> Yeah, that's also a good idea :)