* [PATCH] test/eventdev: avoid configuring port or queue twice
@ 2023-11-07 16:39 Bruce Richardson
2023-11-07 17:35 ` [EXT] " Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Richardson @ 2023-11-07 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev; +Cc: Bruce Richardson, Jerin Jacob
In the basic sanity tests of eventdev for queue and port setup, queue 0
was configured separately before running a loop to configure the rest of
the queues. This loop started from 0, so reconfigured queue 0, and a
similar reconfiguration happens with port 0 in the later port setup
test. While most eventdevs should handle this reconfiguration without
stop/start correctly, it can cause issues, and should be tested
separately from basic config tests.
Therefore, adjust loops to start at 1 rather than 0 and avoid
configuring queue 0 and port 0 twice.
Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
---
app/test/test_eventdev.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test/test_eventdev.c b/app/test/test_eventdev.c
index 993e49af3b..71de947ce4 100644
--- a/app/test/test_eventdev.c
+++ b/app/test/test_eventdev.c
@@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ test_eventdev_queue_setup(void)
RTE_EVENT_DEV_ATTR_QUEUE_COUNT, &queue_count),
"Queue count get failed");
- for (i = 0; i < (int)queue_count; i++) {
+ for (i = 1; i < (int)queue_count; i++) {
ret = rte_event_queue_setup(TEST_DEV_ID, i, NULL);
TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to setup queue%d", i);
}
@@ -786,7 +786,7 @@ test_eventdev_port_setup(void)
RTE_EVENT_DEV_ATTR_PORT_COUNT,
&port_count), "Port count get failed");
- for (i = 0; i < (int)port_count; i++) {
+ for (i = 1; i < (int)port_count; i++) {
ret = rte_event_port_setup(TEST_DEV_ID, i, NULL);
TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to setup port%d", i);
}
--
2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* RE: [EXT] [PATCH] test/eventdev: avoid configuring port or queue twice
2023-11-07 16:39 [PATCH] test/eventdev: avoid configuring port or queue twice Bruce Richardson
@ 2023-11-07 17:35 ` Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
2023-11-10 7:19 ` Jerin Jacob
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula @ 2023-11-07 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Richardson, dev; +Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
> In the basic sanity tests of eventdev for queue and port setup, queue 0
> was configured separately before running a loop to configure the rest of
> the queues. This loop started from 0, so reconfigured queue 0, and a
> similar reconfiguration happens with port 0 in the later port setup
> test. While most eventdevs should handle this reconfiguration without
> stop/start correctly, it can cause issues, and should be tested
> separately from basic config tests.
>
> Therefore, adjust loops to start at 1 rather than 0 and avoid
> configuring queue 0 and port 0 twice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Acked-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@marvell.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_eventdev.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_eventdev.c b/app/test/test_eventdev.c
> index 993e49af3b..71de947ce4 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_eventdev.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_eventdev.c
> @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ test_eventdev_queue_setup(void)
> RTE_EVENT_DEV_ATTR_QUEUE_COUNT,
> &queue_count),
> "Queue count get failed");
>
> - for (i = 0; i < (int)queue_count; i++) {
> + for (i = 1; i < (int)queue_count; i++) {
> ret = rte_event_queue_setup(TEST_DEV_ID, i, NULL);
> TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to setup queue%d", i);
> }
> @@ -786,7 +786,7 @@ test_eventdev_port_setup(void)
> RTE_EVENT_DEV_ATTR_PORT_COUNT,
> &port_count), "Port count get failed");
>
> - for (i = 0; i < (int)port_count; i++) {
> + for (i = 1; i < (int)port_count; i++) {
> ret = rte_event_port_setup(TEST_DEV_ID, i, NULL);
> TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to setup port%d", i);
> }
> --
> 2.39.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [EXT] [PATCH] test/eventdev: avoid configuring port or queue twice
2023-11-07 17:35 ` [EXT] " Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
@ 2023-11-10 7:19 ` Jerin Jacob
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jerin Jacob @ 2023-11-10 7:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
Cc: Bruce Richardson, dev, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 12:22 AM Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
<pbhagavatula@marvell.com> wrote:
>
>
> > In the basic sanity tests of eventdev for queue and port setup, queue 0
> > was configured separately before running a loop to configure the rest of
> > the queues. This loop started from 0, so reconfigured queue 0, and a
> > similar reconfiguration happens with port 0 in the later port setup
> > test. While most eventdevs should handle this reconfiguration without
> > stop/start correctly, it can cause issues, and should be tested
> > separately from basic config tests.
> >
> > Therefore, adjust loops to start at 1 rather than 0 and avoid
> > configuring queue 0 and port 0 twice.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
>
> Acked-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@marvell.com>
Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>
Applied to dpdk-next-eventdev/for-main. Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-10 7:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-11-07 16:39 [PATCH] test/eventdev: avoid configuring port or queue twice Bruce Richardson
2023-11-07 17:35 ` [EXT] " Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
2023-11-10 7:19 ` Jerin Jacob
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).