From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavatula@marvell.com>
To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
dev <dev@dpdk.org>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/reciprocal: fix off by one when divisor is 32bit
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 15:35:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CY4PR1801MB18636CC7E06FFFE72D5096C5DE6B0@CY4PR1801MB1863.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
>Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavatula@marvell.com> writes:
>
>>>Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavatula@marvell.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Any review?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Are we missing an update in the unit test to catch this issue?
>>>>>> >Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We actually caught it in a unit test
>>>>>> >test_reciprocal_division
>>>>>
>>>>>We had this problem since the very start then.
>>>>>
>>>>>Both reciprocal_division and reciprocal_division_perf are in the
>>>"perf"
>>>>>list.
>>>>>Can they be promoted to the standard list?
>>>>
>>>> Both of these tests take >=5 min depending on the platform in use
>>>which is why
>>>> they are placed in perf tests.
>>>
>>>Is it possible to write a smaller set of tests that can be put in the
>>>standard list?
>>>
>>
>> Currently we have MAX_ITERATIONS (1ULL << 32) for both the tests
>> maybe we can reduce it to 1 << 16 for the normal case?
>
>Sounds good to me. If you submit a patch, we can look at the run time
>from the robot submission as well.
>
Yup, I'll send a patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>David Marchand
next reply other threads:[~2019-10-23 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-23 15:35 Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-10-23 15:06 Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
2019-10-23 15:16 ` Aaron Conole
2019-10-23 8:44 Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
2019-10-23 14:06 ` Aaron Conole
2019-09-03 19:16 pbhagavatula
2019-10-15 8:45 ` David Marchand
2019-10-26 14:33 ` David Marchand
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=CY4PR1801MB18636CC7E06FFFE72D5096C5DE6B0@CY4PR1801MB1863.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
--to=pbhagavatula@marvell.com \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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).