From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167D841D3E; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 11:12:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0407840E2D; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 11:12:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4237A40E09 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 11:12:48 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1677751967; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BV+PLDtvtFUlLla6nz2ktr/TTQoJWdQRDwiN1ARm1Ng=; b=Ubvm4kOxHoe4fSHTcPlvyIrl9BypYlmUo5ygb8w0K+NPc/VU1xl6P8cPt7yHJ/ly01Z+4m r4oDay7GGTc33nwsiEOvrLbTrV/F6S33zGnu81V1Guv2604nl4uabuzwKo5/ldRPvd655n AlACjw3dbQ2aTPJ2dPg5bdeIXNvkhYU= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-319-hdRAFNJfNM2RYRw80RRHYQ-1; Thu, 02 Mar 2023 05:12:42 -0500 X-MC-Unique: hdRAFNJfNM2RYRw80RRHYQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FB13101A521; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 10:12:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.39.208.28] (unknown [10.39.208.28]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A5D040C83B6; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 10:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 11:12:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 To: "Chautru, Nicolas" , "Vargas, Hernan" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "gakhil@marvell.com" , "Rix, Tom" Cc: "Zhang, Qi Z" References: <20230215170949.60569-1-hernan.vargas@intel.com> <20230215170949.60569-5-hernan.vargas@intel.com> <72158d97-b9ce-724b-b5bc-df8202657da0@redhat.com> <1eafd7b3-3d12-6e42-31af-378ec94a39dd@redhat.com> <64ba8d62-8a4b-5c0b-0a41-246b61452cee@redhat.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] test/bbdev: add timeout for latency tests In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 2/28/23 23:37, Chautru, Nicolas wrote: > Hi Maxime, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Maxime Coquelin >> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2023 1:45 AM >> To: Vargas, Hernan ; dev@dpdk.org; >> gakhil@marvell.com; Rix, Tom >> Cc: Chautru, Nicolas ; Zhang, Qi Z >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] test/bbdev: add timeout for latency tests >> >> >> >> On 2/24/23 17:59, Vargas, Hernan wrote: >>> Hi Maxime, >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Maxime Coquelin >>>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 2:32 AM >>>> To: Vargas, Hernan ; dev@dpdk.org; >>>> gakhil@marvell.com; Rix, Tom >>>> Cc: Chautru, Nicolas ; Zhang, Qi Z >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] test/bbdev: add timeout for latency >>>> tests >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/22/23 22:13, Vargas, Hernan wrote: >>>>> Hi Maxime, >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Maxime Coquelin >>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2023 10:33 AM >>>>>> To: Vargas, Hernan ; dev@dpdk.org; >>>>>> gakhil@marvell.com; Rix, Tom >>>>>> Cc: Chautru, Nicolas ; Zhang, Qi Z >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] test/bbdev: add timeout for latency >>>>>> tests >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2/15/23 18:09, Hernan Vargas wrote: >>>>>>> Add a timeout to force exit the latency tests in case dequeue >>>>>>> never happens. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hernan Vargas >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++----- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c >>>>>>> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c >>>>>>> index 19b9a5b119..dede0f900e 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c >>>>>>> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c >>>>>>> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #define MAX_QUEUES RTE_MAX_LCORE >>>>>>> #define TEST_REPETITIONS 100 >>>>>>> +#define TIME_OUT_POLL 1e8 >>>>>>> #define WAIT_OFFLOAD_US 1000 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #ifdef RTE_BASEBAND_FPGA_LTE_FEC @@ -4546,6 +4547,7 @@ >>>>>>> latency_test_ldpc_dec(struct rte_mempool *mempool, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> for (i = 0, dequeued = 0; dequeued < num_to_process; ++i) { >>>>>>> uint16_t enq = 0, deq = 0; >>>>>>> + uint32_t time_out = 0; >>>>>>> bool first_time = true; >>>>>>> last_time = 0; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @@ -4597,7 +4599,8 @@ latency_test_ldpc_dec(struct rte_mempool >>>>>> *mempool, >>>>>>> last_time = rte_rdtsc_precise() - >> start_time; >>>>>>> first_time = false; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> - } while (unlikely(burst_sz != deq)); >>>>>>> + time_out++; >>>>>>> + } while ((burst_sz != deq) && (time_out < TIME_OUT_POLL)); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *max_time = RTE_MAX(*max_time, last_time); >>>>>>> *min_time = RTE_MIN(*min_time, last_time); @@ - >> 4606,7 >>>>>> +4609,12 @@ >>>>>>> latency_test_ldpc_dec(struct rte_mempool *mempool, >>>>>>> if (extDdr) >>>>>>> retrieve_harq_ddr(dev_id, queue_id, ops_enq, >>>>>> burst_sz); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - if (test_vector.op_type != RTE_BBDEV_OP_NONE) { >>>>>>> + if (burst_sz != deq) { >>>>>>> + struct rte_bbdev_info info; >>>>>>> + ret = TEST_FAILED; >>>>>>> + rte_bbdev_info_get(dev_id, &info); >>>>>> >>>>>> What is the point of calling rte_bbdev_info_get() here and below? >>>>>> info is not used afterwards. >>>>> >>>>> The reason for calling this function is to check the device status >>>>> and if there >>>> is something wrong the PMD would display it to standard output. >>>> >>>> What kind of info exactly, I don't see much meaningful logs in >>>> rte_bbdev_info_get() except printing error if dev_info == NULL. >>> >>> rte_bbdev_info_get() calls the device's info_get function that is specified in >> the PMD. >>> For example, for ACC100, acc100_dev_info_get() gets called to check the >> device status. >> >> Ok, I looked at this function and it might be more relevant to mention >> vrb1 than acc100, because acc100 does not support device status: >> >> /* Check the status of device */ >> dev_info->device_status = RTE_BBDEV_DEV_NOT_SUPPORTED; >> >> Also, this dev_info->device_status field is set by all the drivers but never read >> (neither by the driver, nor library nor apps). >> >> So if this is the only reason rte_bbdev_info_get() is called, that is quite useless. >> Am I missing someting? > > Note the device status is printed in the bbdev-test app in that other patchset in the series https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230215170949.60569-7-hernan.vargas@intel.com/ Not related to this patch, but maybe you should use an assert in the patch you link above. Indeed, what is the point of continuing the init if the device status is "FATAL_ERR"? > Also calling that function then exercise interaction with underlying HW and PF driver which is valuable and the expected usecase. > This is indeed relevant from vrb1 in term of current intel PMD implementation, but the bbdev-test is HW agnostic. > Let us know if unclear, OK, that's clearer. For this patch: Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin Thanks, Maxime > Thanks, > Nic > > >> >> Thanks, >> Maxime >> >>> Thanks, >>> Hernan >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Maxime >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Dequeue timeout!"); >>>>>>> + } else if (test_vector.op_type != RTE_BBDEV_OP_NONE) { >>>>>>> ret = validate_ldpc_dec_op(ops_deq, burst_sz, >>>>>> ref_op, >>>>>>> vector_mask); >>>>>>> TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Validation >> failed!"); @@ >>>>>> -4632,6 >>>>>>> +4640,7 @@ latency_test_enc(struct rte_mempool *mempool, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> for (i = 0, dequeued = 0; dequeued < num_to_process; ++i) { >>>>>>> uint16_t enq = 0, deq = 0; >>>>>>> + uint32_t time_out = 0; >>>>>>> bool first_time = true; >>>>>>> last_time = 0; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @@ -4667,13 +4676,18 @@ latency_test_enc(struct rte_mempool >>>>>> *mempool, >>>>>>> last_time += rte_rdtsc_precise() - >> start_time; >>>>>>> first_time = false; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> - } while (unlikely(burst_sz != deq)); >>>>>>> + time_out++; >>>>>>> + } while ((burst_sz != deq) && (time_out < TIME_OUT_POLL)); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *max_time = RTE_MAX(*max_time, last_time); >>>>>>> *min_time = RTE_MIN(*min_time, last_time); >>>>>>> *total_time += last_time; >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> - if (test_vector.op_type != RTE_BBDEV_OP_NONE) { >>>>>>> + if (burst_sz != deq) { >>>>>>> + struct rte_bbdev_info info; >>>>>>> + ret = TEST_FAILED; >>>>>>> + rte_bbdev_info_get(dev_id, &info); >>>>>> >>>>>> Same here. >>>>>> >>>>>>> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Dequeue timeout!"); >>>>>>> + } else if (test_vector.op_type != RTE_BBDEV_OP_NONE) { >>>>>>> ret = validate_enc_op(ops_deq, burst_sz, >> ref_op); >>>>>>> TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Validation >> failed!"); >>>>>>> } >>>>> >>> >