On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:34:28AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:19:51AM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh [mailto:pbhagavat...@caviumnetworks.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 7:27 PM > > > To: jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com; Richardson, Bruce > > > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Van Haaren, Harry > > > <harry.van.haa...@intel.com>; Eads, Gage <gage.e...@intel.com>; > > > hemant.agra...@nxp.com; nipun.gu...@nxp.com; Ma, Liang J > > > <liang.j...@intel.com> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavat...@caviumnetworks.com> > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/7] event/octeontx: move eventdev octeontx > > > test > > > to driver > > > > > > Move octeontx eventdev specific test (test_eventdev_octeontx.c) to > > > driver/event/octeontx. > > > > <snip patch content> > > > > Replying to 1st patch, as no cover letter; > > > > Summary of patchset: > > - Move tests for a specific Eventdev PMD into the PMD dir: > > drivers/event/x/x_selftest.c > > - Enable self tests to run when passed the vdev arg "self-test=1" > > > > > > A few comments on this change; > > > > 1) We should not lose the capability to run tests as part of the existing > > unit testing infrastructure. We should not fragment the testing tool - > > requiring multiple binaries to test a single component. > > > > From discussion on #IRC, it seems reasonable to call rte_eal_vdev_init() > > with "self-test=1" from the test/test/ code, and then we can continue to > > use the existing test infrastructure despite that the actual tests are now > > part of each PMD. > > > > 2) We should not copy/paste TEST_ASSERT macros into new test files. > > Abstracting the TEST_ASSERT and other macros out to a header file would > > solve this duplication. > > > > > > Specific comments will be sent as replies to the patches. Cheers, -Harry > > What I gather from a cursory glance at this set is that the self tests > are designed to be triggered via devargs to the device driver, correct? > I'm not sure I like this approach, though I do agree with having the > tests inside the individual drivers. > > What I think I would prefer to see is the self-tests being called via an > API rather than via devargs. I think we should add a > "rte_event_dev_self_test()" API to the eventdev library, and have that > then call into the driver-provided tests. This means that self-tests can > only be called by applications which are set up to allow the tests to be > called, e.g. the autotest binary, while also avoiding the issue of > having lots of driver specifics clutter up test binaries.
Agreed, will modify it to ops based scheme so that application can call driver specific `event_dev_self_test` and register selftest in test/test/test_eventdev.c. Although we would like to retain devargs selftest scheme for event_octeontx. I will remove it for event_sw. Does that sound good? > > Regards, > /Bruce Regards, Pavan
