Hello,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 7:04 PM Harry van Haaren
<harry.van.haa...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On some CI runs, some service-cores tests spuriously fail as the
> service lcore thread is not actually scheduled by the OS in the
> given amount of time.
>
> Increasing timeouts has not resolved the issue in the CI, so the
> solution in this patch is to move them to a separate perf test
> suite.
>
> Signed-off-by: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>
>
> ---
>
> See DPDK ML discussion in this thread:
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-February/263523.html
> ---
> app/test/meson.build | 1 +
> app/test/test_service_cores.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/meson.build b/app/test/meson.build
> index f34d19e3c3..2db5ccf4ff 100644
> --- a/app/test/meson.build
> +++ b/app/test/meson.build
> @@ -287,6 +287,7 @@ perf_test_names = [
> 'pie_perf',
> 'distributor_perf_autotest',
> 'pmd_perf_autotest',
> + 'service_perf_autotest',
> 'stack_perf_autotest',
> 'stack_lf_perf_autotest',
> 'rand_perf_autotest',
> diff --git a/app/test/test_service_cores.c b/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> index 637fcd7cf9..06653dfdef 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_service_cores.c
> @@ -1022,17 +1022,12 @@ static struct unit_test_suite service_tests = {
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_name),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_get_by_name),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_dump),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_attr_get),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_attr_get),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_probe_capability),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_start_stop),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_add_del),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_start_stop),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_en_dis_able),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_mt_unsafe_poll),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_mt_safe_poll),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_safe),
> - TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL,
> service_app_lcore_mt_unsafe),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_may_be_active),
> TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_active_two_cores),
> TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
> @@ -1046,3 +1041,30 @@ test_service_common(void)
> }
>
> REGISTER_TEST_COMMAND(service_autotest, test_service_common);
> +
> +
> +/* The tests below have been split from the auto-test suite, as the
What is the auto-test suite?
Plus "as the when" reads strange.
In the end, I don't think it helps much to have this comment in the code.
The commitlog is supposed to tell the story, so I would simply remove
this comment.
> + * when they are run in a cloud CI environment they can give false-positive
> + * errors, due to the service-cores not being scheduled by the OS.
> + */
> +static struct unit_test_suite service_perf_tests = {
> + .suite_name = "service core test suite",
Maybe add "performance" in the name, so we have a uniquely named
testsuite object.
> + .setup = testsuite_setup,
> + .teardown = testsuite_teardown,
> + .unit_test_cases = {
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_attr_get),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_attr_get),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_lcore_start_stop),
Looking at service_lcore_running_check(), don't you think
service_may_be_active() and service_active_two_cores() are also
subject to race?
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL, service_app_lcore_mt_safe),
> + TEST_CASE_ST(dummy_register, NULL,
> service_app_lcore_mt_unsafe),
> + TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
> + }
> +};
> +
> +static int
> +test_service_perf(void)
> +{
> + return unit_test_suite_runner(&service_perf_tests);
> +}
> +
> +REGISTER_TEST_COMMAND(service_perf_autotest, test_service_perf);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
David Marchand
