<snip>
> >> > >
> >> > > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
> >> > > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free
> >> > > APIs have.
> >> > >
> >> > > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli
> >> > > <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
> >> > > ---
> >> > > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
> >> > > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >> > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >> > >
> >> > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c
> >> > > 100644
> >> > > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
> >> > test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
> >> > > void *arg) }
> >> > >
> >> > > static int
> >> > > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> >> > > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
> >> > > {
> >> > > unsigned int i;
> >> > >
> >> > > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
> >> > use_jhash)
> >> > > else
> >> > > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
> >> > >
> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag =
> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> >> > > if (use_htm)
> >> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
>
> [Wang, Yipeng] Thanks for the patch Honnappa. Here I think we still need the
> RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY
> Flag even with HTM.
I have made RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY depend on 'rw_lf' flag. The
test case HTM + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY will still run when 'rw_lf'
is set to 0.
>
> Other commits in this series look good to me and seems David already
> applied.
>
> Thanks!
