On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 5:06 PM Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> wrote: > > > From: David Marchand [mailto:david.march...@redhat.com] > > Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2024 12.45 > > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 12:57 PM Mattias Rönnblom > > <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > > + static int > > \ > > > + run_parallel_test_and_modify ## size(void *arg) \ > > > + { > > \ > > > + struct parallel_test_and_set_lcore ## size *lcore = > > arg; \ > > > + uint64_t deadline = rte_get_timer_cycles() + > > \ > > > + PARALLEL_TEST_RUNTIME * rte_get_timer_hz(); > > \ > > > + do { > > \ > > > + bool old_value; > > \ > > > + bool new_value = rte_rand() & 1; > > \ > > > + bool use_assign = rte_rand() & 1; > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + if (use_assign) > > \ > > > + old_value = > > rte_bit_atomic_test_and_assign( \ > > > + lcore->word, lcore->bit, > > new_value, \ > > > + rte_memory_order_relaxed); > > \ > > > + else > > \ > > > + old_value = new_value ? > > \ > > > + rte_bit_atomic_test_and_set( > > \ > > > + lcore->word, lcore- > > >bit, \ > > > + > > rte_memory_order_relaxed) : \ > > > + > > rte_bit_atomic_test_and_clear( \ > > > + lcore->word, lcore- > > >bit, \ > > > + > > rte_memory_order_relaxed); \ > > > + if (old_value != new_value) > > \ > > > + lcore->flips++; > > \ > > > + } while (rte_get_timer_cycles() < deadline); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + return 0; > > \ > > > + } > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + static int > > \ > > > + test_bit_atomic_parallel_test_and_modify ## size(void) > > \ > > > + { > > \ > > > + unsigned int worker_lcore_id; > > \ > > > + uint ## size ## _t word = 0; > > \ > > > + unsigned int bit = rte_rand_max(size); > > \ > > > + struct parallel_test_and_set_lcore ## size lmain = { > > \ > > > + .word = &word, > > \ > > > + .bit = bit > > \ > > > + }; > > \ > > > + struct parallel_test_and_set_lcore ## size lworker = > > { \ > > > + .word = &word, > > \ > > > + .bit = bit > > \ > > > + }; > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + if (rte_lcore_count() < 2) { > > \ > > > + printf("Need multiple cores to run parallel > > test.\n"); \ > > > + return TEST_SKIPPED; > > \ > > > + } > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + worker_lcore_id = rte_get_next_lcore(-1, 1, 0); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + int rc = > > rte_eal_remote_launch(run_parallel_test_and_modify ## size, \ > > > + &lworker, > > worker_lcore_id); \ > > > + TEST_ASSERT(rc == 0, "Worker thread launch failed"); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + run_parallel_test_and_modify ## size(&lmain); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + rte_eal_mp_wait_lcore(); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + uint64_t total_flips = lmain.flips + lworker.flips; > > \ > > > + bool expected_value = total_flips % 2; > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + TEST_ASSERT(expected_value == rte_bit_test(&word, > > bit), \ > > > + "After %"PRId64" flips, the bit value " > > \ > > > + "should be %d", total_flips, > > expected_value); \ > > > + > > \ > > > + uint64_t expected_word = 0; > > \ > > > + rte_bit_assign(&expected_word, bit, expected_value); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + TEST_ASSERT(expected_word == word, "Untouched bits > > have " \ > > > + "changed value"); > > \ > > > + > > \ > > > + return TEST_SUCCESS; > > \ > > > + } > > > + > > > +GEN_TEST_BIT_PARALLEL_TEST_AND_MODIFY(32) > > > +GEN_TEST_BIT_PARALLEL_TEST_AND_MODIFY(64) > > > > It appears this test failed once in the CI for an unrelated series > > (uAPI kernel header import): > > https://lab.dpdk.org/results/dashboard/testruns/logs/1385993/ > > > > + TestCase [ 0] : test_bit_access32 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 1] : test_bit_access64 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 2] : test_bit_access32 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 3] : test_bit_access64 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 4] : test_bit_v_access32 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 5] : test_bit_v_access64 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 6] : test_bit_atomic_access32 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 7] : test_bit_atomic_access64 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 8] : test_bit_atomic_v_access32 succeeded > > + TestCase [ 9] : test_bit_atomic_v_access64 succeeded > > + TestCase [10] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_assign32 succeeded > > + TestCase [11] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_assign64 succeeded > > + TestCase [12] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_test_and_modify32 failed > > + TestCase [13] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_test_and_modify64 succeeded > > + TestCase [14] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_flip32 succeeded > > + TestCase [15] : test_bit_atomic_parallel_flip64 succeeded > > + TestCase [16] : test_bit_relaxed_set succeeded > > + TestCase [17] : test_bit_relaxed_clear succeeded > > + TestCase [18] : test_bit_relaxed_test_set_clear succeeded > > > > EAL: Test assert test_bit_atomic_parallel_test_and_modify32 line 236 > > failed: After 1070523 flips, the bit value should be 1 > > > > Please have a look. > > The Coverity report [1] just gave me an idea: > > worker_lcore_id = rte_get_next_lcore(-1, 1, 0); > + TEST_ASSERT(worker_lcore_id < RTE_MAX_LCORE, "Worker thread allocation > failed"); > > Or even better: > Improve rte_eal_remote_launch() by checking the validity of the worker_id > parameter. > > [1]: > https://scan4.scan.coverity.com/#/project-view/60887/10075?selectedIssue=445384 >
I have the same fix in my workdir, I was about to send, but if you want to do it, go ahead. -- David Marchand
