On 10/23/20 4:42 PM, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
> Adding explicit check in ut that the stats counters
> have the expect values. Was missing for coverage.
missing from coverage
?
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chau...@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Aidan Goddard <aidan.godd...@accelercomm.com>
> Acked-by: Dave Burley <dave.bur...@accelercomm.com>
> ---
> app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> index 3554a77..b62848e 100644
> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> @@ -4840,6 +4840,23 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct active_device
> *ad,
> (double)(time_st.deq_max_time * 1000000) /
> rte_get_tsc_hz());
>
> + struct rte_bbdev_stats stats = {0};
Other calls to get_bbdev_queue_stats do not initialize stats and likely should
> + get_bbdev_queue_stats(ad->dev_id, queue_id, &stats);
Should check the return here.
> + if (op_type != RTE_BBDEV_OP_LDPC_DEC) {
This logic seems off.
Do you mean to check only enc stats with an enc op ?
Similar for dec.
> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(stats.enqueued_count != num_to_process,
> + "Mismatch in enqueue count %10"PRIu64" %d",
> + stats.enqueued_count, num_to_process);
> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(stats.dequeued_count != num_to_process,
> + "Mismatch in dequeue count %10"PRIu64" %d",
> + stats.dequeued_count, num_to_process);
> + }
> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(stats.enqueue_err_count != 0,
> + "Enqueue count Error %10"PRIu64"",
> + stats.enqueue_err_count);
> + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(stats.dequeue_err_count != 0,
> + "Dequeue count Error (%10"PRIu64"",
> + stats.dequeue_err_count);
> +
> return TEST_SUCCESS;
> #endif
> }
