DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
To: "Dybkowski, AdamX" <adamx.dybkowski@intel.com>,
	Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>,
	"Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Cc: Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya <pathreya@marvell.com>,
	Ankur Dwivedi <adwivedi@marvell.com>,
	"De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: remove tests for unsupported	descriptors
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 13:26:43 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <MN2PR18MB287701DD044B61DF6BE01BFCDFBE0@MN2PR18MB2877.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR11MB3910E745055F34294247A26CEDBE0@BY5PR11MB3910.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Hi Adam,

The crypto library doesn't specify an upper limit for the nb_descriptors to be passed for queue_pair_setup. So technically all the values that you have passed as invalid is not correct.

I did check few PMDs when I saw this issue with OCTEON TX2 crypto PMD. QAT support max 4096 descriptors and so the invalids that is present is exactly following that. I checked DPAA drivers, but in that the entire conf is left unused. So I'm not sure whether DPAA passes these cases. I couldn't check the entire list that you have mentioned. But it doesn't much sense for s/w PMDs to limit max_nb_descriptors. 

If we need to have an invalid check, we should probably add max_nb_descriptors in dev_info. And then we can have these tests. I'm open for that idea also. But I don't know whether that is allowed now or not. I leave that to Akhil.

Thanks,
Anoob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dybkowski, AdamX <adamx.dybkowski@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 6:37 PM
> To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>;
> Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty@intel.com>
> Cc: Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya <pathreya@marvell.com>; Ankur Dwivedi
> <adwivedi@marvell.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [EXT] RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: remove tests for
> unsupported descriptors
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Anoob.
> 
> What's wrong with this test? Is this unit test failing on any PMD now?
> I've checked on several (QAT, OpenSSL, SW ZUC, SW KASUMI, SW SNOW3G,
> SCHEDULER) and it passes everywhere. Then why should we remove it
> completely?
> 
> Adam
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Anoob Joseph
> > Sent: Tuesday, 12 May, 2020 09:12
> > To: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>; Doherty, Declan
> > <declan.doherty@intel.com>
> > Cc: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>; Narayana Prasad
> > <pathreya@marvell.com>; Ankur Dwivedi <adwivedi@marvell.com>; De Lara
> > Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/crypto: remove tests for unsupported
> > descriptors
> >
> > Cryptodev doesn't limit the number of descriptors that can be
> > supported by the PMD.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoobj@marvell.com>
> > ---
> >  app/test/test_cryptodev.c | 45
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 45 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test/test_cryptodev.c b/app/test/test_cryptodev.c
> > index
> > c624018..1ed2df8 100644
> > --- a/app/test/test_cryptodev.c
> > +++ b/app/test/test_cryptodev.c
> > @@ -891,36 +891,6 @@ test_queue_pair_descriptor_setup(void)
> >  				ts_params->valid_devs[0]);
> >  	}
> >
> > -	/* invalid number of descriptors - max supported + 2 */
> > -	qp_conf.nb_descriptors = MAX_NUM_OPS_INFLIGHT + 2;
> > -
> > -	for (qp_id = 0; qp_id < ts_params->conf.nb_queue_pairs; qp_id++) {
> > -		TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup(
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0], qp_id, &qp_conf,
> > -				rte_cryptodev_socket_id(
> > -						ts_params->valid_devs[0])),
> > -				"Unexpectedly passed test for "
> > -				"rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup:"
> > -				"num_inflights %u on qp %u on cryptodev
> > %u",
> > -				qp_conf.nb_descriptors, qp_id,
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0]);
> > -	}
> > -
> > -	/* invalid number of descriptors - max value of parameter */
> > -	qp_conf.nb_descriptors = UINT32_MAX-1;
> > -
> > -	for (qp_id = 0; qp_id < ts_params->conf.nb_queue_pairs; qp_id++) {
> > -		TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup(
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0], qp_id, &qp_conf,
> > -				rte_cryptodev_socket_id(
> > -						ts_params->valid_devs[0])),
> > -				"Unexpectedly passed test for "
> > -				"rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup:"
> > -				"num_inflights %u on qp %u on cryptodev
> > %u",
> > -				qp_conf.nb_descriptors, qp_id,
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0]);
> > -	}
> > -
> >  	qp_conf.nb_descriptors = DEFAULT_NUM_OPS_INFLIGHT;
> >
> >  	for (qp_id = 0; qp_id < ts_params->conf.nb_queue_pairs; qp_id++) {
> > @@ -935,21 +905,6 @@ test_queue_pair_descriptor_setup(void)
> >  				ts_params->valid_devs[0]);
> >  	}
> >
> > -	/* invalid number of descriptors - max supported + 1 */
> > -	qp_conf.nb_descriptors = DEFAULT_NUM_OPS_INFLIGHT + 1;
> > -
> > -	for (qp_id = 0; qp_id < ts_params->conf.nb_queue_pairs; qp_id++) {
> > -		TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup(
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0], qp_id, &qp_conf,
> > -				rte_cryptodev_socket_id(
> > -						ts_params->valid_devs[0])),
> > -				"Unexpectedly passed test for "
> > -				"rte_cryptodev_queue_pair_setup:"
> > -				"num_inflights %u on qp %u on cryptodev
> > %u",
> > -				qp_conf.nb_descriptors, qp_id,
> > -				ts_params->valid_devs[0]);
> > -	}
> > -
> >  	/* test invalid queue pair id */
> >  	qp_conf.nb_descriptors = DEFAULT_NUM_OPS_INFLIGHT;
> > 	/*valid */
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-12 13:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-12  7:12 Anoob Joseph
2020-05-12 13:07 ` Dybkowski, AdamX
2020-05-12 13:19   ` Akhil Goyal
2020-05-12 13:26   ` Anoob Joseph [this message]
2020-05-13  8:33     ` Dybkowski, AdamX
2020-05-15 18:09       ` Akhil Goyal

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=MN2PR18MB287701DD044B61DF6BE01BFCDFBE0@MN2PR18MB2877.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=anoobj@marvell.com \
    --cc=adamx.dybkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=adwivedi@marvell.com \
    --cc=akhil.goyal@nxp.com \
    --cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=pathreya@marvell.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).