Hi David,
Thank you for the patch!
Some comments inlined.
> On May 22, 2019, at 10:06 AM, David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
> Prefer the existing apis rather than direct access the configuration
> structure.
>
> test_hash_multi_add_lookup() currently starts n readers and N writers
> using rte_eal_remote_launch().
> It then waits for the N writers to complete with a custom
> multi_writer_done[] array to synchronise over.
> Jump on the occasion to use rte_eal_wait_lcore() so that the code is
> more straightforward:
> - we start n readers with rte_eal_remote_launch(),
> - we start N writers with rte_eal_remote_launch(),
> - we wait for N writers to join with rte_eal_wait_lcore(),
> - we wait for n readers to join with rte_eal_wait_lcore(),
>
> Fixes: c7eb0972e74b ("test/hash: add lock-free r/w concurrency")
> Fixes: 3f9aab961ed3 ("test/hash: check lock-free extendable bucket")
> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> ---
> Changelog since v1:
> - fixed test hang in test_hash_multi_add_lookup() reported by Wang, Yipeng
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> index 4ab4c8e..343a338 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> @@ -86,7 +86,6 @@ struct {
> static rte_atomic64_t greads;
>
> static volatile uint8_t writer_done;
> -static volatile uint8_t multi_writer_done[4];
>
> uint16_t enabled_core_ids[RTE_MAX_LCORE];
>
> @@ -690,7 +689,6 @@ struct {
> for (i = offset; i < offset + tbl_rwc_test_param.single_insert; i++)
> rte_hash_add_key(tbl_rwc_test_param.h,
> tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_ks + i);
> - multi_writer_done[pos_core] = 1;
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -738,10 +736,9 @@ struct {
> rte_eal_remote_launch(test_rwc_reader,
> (void *)(uintptr_t)read_type,
> enabled_core_ids[i]);
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
(There are similar changes in other functions too.
I realize that this is a separate issue than what the patch is aimed for.
If you see fit, please integrate it, else I will put out a patch once your
patch has been merged.)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -758,6 +755,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -808,12 +806,11 @@ struct {
> enabled_core_ids[i]);
> ret = write_keys(write_type);
> writer_done = 1;
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> if (ret < 0)
> goto err;
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -830,6 +827,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -884,12 +882,11 @@ struct {
> write_type = WRITE_KEY_SHIFT;
> ret = write_keys(write_type);
> writer_done = 1;
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> if (ret < 0)
> goto err;
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -906,6 +903,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -960,12 +958,11 @@ struct {
> write_type = WRITE_KEY_SHIFT;
> ret = write_keys(write_type);
> writer_done = 1;
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> if (ret < 0)
> goto err;
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -982,6 +979,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -1035,12 +1033,11 @@ struct {
> write_type = WRITE_KEY_SHIFT;
> ret = write_keys(write_type);
> writer_done = 1;
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> if (ret < 0)
> goto err;
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -1056,6 +1053,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -1108,8 +1106,6 @@ struct {
>
> rte_hash_reset(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> writer_done = 0;
> - for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
> - multi_writer_done[i] = 0;
> write_type = WRITE_NO_KEY_SHIFT;
> if (write_keys(write_type) < 0)
> goto err;
> @@ -1133,15 +1129,15 @@ struct {
> }
>
> /* Wait for writers to complete */
> - for (i = 0; i < rwc_core_cnt[m]; i++)
> - while
> - (multi_writer_done[i] == 0);
> - writer_done = 1;
> + for (i = rwc_core_cnt[n] + 1;
> + i <= rwc_core_cnt[m] + rwc_core_cnt[n];
> + i++)
> + rte_eal_wait_lcore(i);
rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> + writer_done = 1;
>
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -1160,6 +1156,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -1222,10 +1219,9 @@ struct {
> }
> }
> writer_done = 1;
> - rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
>
> for (i = 1; i <= rwc_core_cnt[n]; i++)
> - if (lcore_config[i].ret < 0)
> + if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(i) < 0)
if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
> goto err;
>
> unsigned long long cycles_per_lookup =
> @@ -1242,6 +1238,7 @@ struct {
> return 0;
>
> err:
> + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore();
> rte_hash_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.h);
> return -1;
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
Thank you,
Dharmik Thakkar
