> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Rix <t...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 5:56 AM
> To: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chau...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
> akhil.go...@nxp.com
> Cc: david.march...@redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] app/bbdev: add explicit ut for latency vs
> validation
>
>
> On 10/23/20 4:42 PM, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
> > Adding explicit different ut when testing for validation or latency
> > (early termination enabled or not).
> >
> > 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 | 92
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> Should update the copyright.
> > 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> > b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> > index 6e5535d..3554a77 100644
> > --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> > +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c
> > @@ -3999,12 +3999,14 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
> active_device *ad,
> > return i;
> > }
> >
> > +/* Test case for latency/validation for LDPC Decoder */
> > static int
> > latency_test_ldpc_dec(struct rte_mempool *mempool,
> > struct test_buffers *bufs, struct rte_bbdev_dec_op *ref_op,
> > int vector_mask, uint16_t dev_id, uint16_t queue_id,
> > const uint16_t num_to_process, uint16_t burst_sz,
> > - uint64_t *total_time, uint64_t *min_time, uint64_t
> *max_time)
> > + uint64_t *total_time, uint64_t *min_time, uint64_t
> *max_time,
> > + bool disable_et)
> > {
> > int ret = TEST_SUCCESS;
> > uint16_t i, j, dequeued;
> > @@ -4026,7 +4028,7 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
> active_device *ad,
> > "rte_bbdev_dec_op_alloc_bulk() failed");
> >
> > /* For latency tests we need to disable early termination */
> > - if (check_bit(ref_op->ldpc_dec.op_flags,
> > + if (disable_et && check_bit(ref_op->ldpc_dec.op_flags,
> >
> RTE_BBDEV_LDPC_ITERATION_STOP_ENABLE))
> > ref_op->ldpc_dec.op_flags -=
> >
> RTE_BBDEV_LDPC_ITERATION_STOP_ENABLE;
> Bit clearing is usually done with &= ~()
This is the coding style for rest of the file hence sticking to it.
> > @@ -4248,7 +4250,7 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
> active_device *ad,
> > TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(op_type_str, "Invalid op type: %u",
> op_type);
> >
> > printf("+ ------------------------------------------------------- +\n");
> > - printf("== test: validation/latency\ndev: %s, burst size: %u, num ops:
> %u, op type: %s\n",
> > + printf("== test: latency\ndev: %s, burst size: %u, num ops: %u, op
> > +type: %s\n",
> > info.dev_name, burst_sz, num_to_process,
> op_type_str);
> >
> > if (op_type == RTE_BBDEV_OP_TURBO_DEC) @@ -4270,7 +4272,83
> @@
> > typedef int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
> > iter = latency_test_ldpc_dec(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > op_params->ref_dec_op, op_params-
> >vector_mask,
> > ad->dev_id, queue_id, num_to_process,
> > + burst_sz, &total_time, &min_time,
> &max_time,
> > + true);
> > + else
> > + iter = latency_test_enc(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > + op_params->ref_enc_op,
> > + ad->dev_id, queue_id,
> > + num_to_process, burst_sz,
> &total_time,
> > + &min_time, &max_time);
>
> This is a repeat of RTE_BBDEV_OP_TURBO_ENC.
>
> Do not need both.
Fair enough. That is part of previous code but can simplify.
>
> If the point is to have a else and not fail when the op_type is unknown, then
>
> remove the earlier all and comment the else something like
>
> else /* RTE_BBDEC_OP_TURBO_ENC */
>
> > +
> > + if (iter <= 0)
> > + return TEST_FAILED;
> > +
> > + printf("Operation latency:\n"
> > + "\tavg: %lg cycles, %lg us\n"
> > + "\tmin: %lg cycles, %lg us\n"
> > + "\tmax: %lg cycles, %lg us\n",
> > + (double)total_time / (double)iter,
> > + (double)(total_time * 1000000) / (double)iter /
> > + (double)rte_get_tsc_hz(), (double)min_time,
> > + (double)(min_time * 1000000) /
> (double)rte_get_tsc_hz(),
> > + (double)max_time, (double)(max_time * 1000000) /
> > + (double)rte_get_tsc_hz());
> Could remove a tab from the last 9 lines for better alignment with printf
I am unsure I follow. The recommended spacing is 2 tabs for continuation and
unsure how the alignment would be better.
I typically only reduce to 1 tab only if I have to (80 chars limit becoming
cumbersome with nested statements).
> > +
> > + return TEST_SUCCESS;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int
> > +validation_test(struct active_device *ad,
> > + struct test_op_params *op_params)
> > +{
> > + int iter;
> > + uint16_t burst_sz = op_params->burst_sz;
> > + const uint16_t num_to_process = op_params->num_to_process;
> > + const enum rte_bbdev_op_type op_type = test_vector.op_type;
> > + const uint16_t queue_id = ad->queue_ids[0];
> > + struct test_buffers *bufs = NULL;
> > + struct rte_bbdev_info info;
> > + uint64_t total_time, min_time, max_time;
> > + const char *op_type_str;
> > +
> > + total_time = max_time = 0;
> > + min_time = UINT64_MAX;
> > +
> > + TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS((burst_sz > MAX_BURST),
> > + "BURST_SIZE should be <= %u", MAX_BURST);
> > +
> > + rte_bbdev_info_get(ad->dev_id, &info);
> > + bufs = &op_params-
> >q_bufs[GET_SOCKET(info.socket_id)][queue_id];
> > +
> > + op_type_str = rte_bbdev_op_type_str(op_type);
> > + TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(op_type_str, "Invalid op type: %u",
> op_type);
> > +
> > + printf("+ ------------------------------------------------------- +\n");
> > + printf("== test: validation\ndev: %s, burst size: %u, num ops: %u, op
> type: %s\n",
> > + info.dev_name, burst_sz, num_to_process,
> op_type_str);
> > +
> > + if (op_type == RTE_BBDEV_OP_TURBO_DEC)
> > + iter = latency_test_dec(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > + op_params->ref_dec_op, op_params-
> >vector_mask,
> > + ad->dev_id, queue_id, num_to_process,
> > burst_sz, &total_time, &min_time,
> &max_time);
> > + else if (op_type == RTE_BBDEV_OP_TURBO_ENC)
> > + iter = latency_test_enc(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > + op_params->ref_enc_op, ad->dev_id,
> queue_id,
> > + num_to_process, burst_sz, &total_time,
> > + &min_time, &max_time);
> > + else if (op_type == RTE_BBDEV_OP_LDPC_ENC)
> > + iter = latency_test_ldpc_enc(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > + op_params->ref_enc_op, ad->dev_id,
> queue_id,
> > + num_to_process, burst_sz, &total_time,
> > + &min_time, &max_time);
> > + else if (op_type == RTE_BBDEV_OP_LDPC_DEC)
> > + iter = latency_test_ldpc_dec(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > + op_params->ref_dec_op, op_params-
> >vector_mask,
> > + ad->dev_id, queue_id, num_to_process,
> > + burst_sz, &total_time, &min_time,
> &max_time,
> > + false);
>
> This 'false' is the only change from f latency_test.
>
> These should be refactored to a common function. Then use a #define or
> similar wrapper for calling with/without this flag.
Fair enough. Thanks. I will push an update later today.
>
> Tom
>
> > else
> > iter = latency_test_enc(op_params->mp, bufs,
> > op_params->ref_enc_op,
> > @@ -4930,6 +5008,12 @@ typedef int (test_case_function)(struct
> > active_device *ad, }
> >
> > static int
> > +validation_tc(void)
> > +{
> > + return run_test_case(validation_test); }
> > +
> > +static int
> > interrupt_tc(void)
> > {
> > return run_test_case(throughput_test); @@ -4960,7 +5044,7 @@
> typedef
> > int (test_case_function)(struct active_device *ad,
> > .setup = testsuite_setup,
> > .teardown = testsuite_teardown,
> > .unit_test_cases = {
> > - TEST_CASE_ST(ut_setup, ut_teardown, latency_tc),
> > + TEST_CASE_ST(ut_setup, ut_teardown, validation_tc),
> > TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
> > }
> > };
