[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 04/11] event/octeontx: modify octeontx eventdev test

Neil Horman nhorman at tuxdriver.com
Tue Dec 26 15:11:56 CET 2017


On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 12:47:31AM +0530, Pavan Nikhilesh wrote:
> Modify test_eventdev_octeontx to be standalone selftest independent of
> test framework.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula at caviumnetworks.com>
> ---
>  drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c | 427 +++++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 234 insertions(+), 193 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c b/drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c
> index 8fddb4fd2..3877bca4a 100644
> --- a/drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c
> +++ b/drivers/event/octeontx/octeontx_evdev_selftest.c
> @@ -46,12 +46,21 @@
>  #include <rte_per_lcore.h>
>  #include <rte_random.h>
>  #include <rte_bus_vdev.h>
> +#include <rte_test.h>
>  
> -#include "test.h"
> +#include "ssovf_evdev.h"
>  
>  #define NUM_PACKETS (1 << 18)
>  #define MAX_EVENTS  (16 * 1024)
>  
> +#define OCTEONTX_TEST_RUN(setup, teardown, test) \
> +	octeontx_test_run(setup, teardown, test, #test)
> +
> +static int total;
> +static int passed;
> +static int failed;
> +static int unsupported;
> +
>  static int evdev;
>  static struct rte_mempool *eventdev_test_mempool;
>  
> @@ -79,11 +88,11 @@ static inline int
>  seqn_list_update(int val)
>  {
>  	if (seqn_list_index >= NUM_PACKETS)
> -		return TEST_FAILED;
> +		return -1;
>  
>  	seqn_list[seqn_list_index++] = val;
>  	rte_smp_wmb();
> -	return TEST_SUCCESS;
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static inline int
> @@ -93,11 +102,11 @@ seqn_list_check(int limit)
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
>  		if (seqn_list[i] != i) {
> -			printf("Seqn mismatch %d %d\n", seqn_list[i], i);
> -			return TEST_FAILED;
> +			ssovf_log_dbg("Seqn mismatch %d %d", seqn_list[i], i);
> +			return -1;
>  		}
>  	}
> -	return TEST_SUCCESS;
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  struct test_core_param {
> @@ -114,20 +123,21 @@ testsuite_setup(void)
>  
>  	evdev = rte_event_dev_get_dev_id(eventdev_name);
>  	if (evdev < 0) {
> -		printf("%d: Eventdev %s not found - creating.\n",
> +		ssovf_log_dbg("%d: Eventdev %s not found - creating.",
>  				__LINE__, eventdev_name);
>  		if (rte_vdev_init(eventdev_name, NULL) < 0) {
> -			printf("Error creating eventdev %s\n", eventdev_name);
> -			return TEST_FAILED;
> +			ssovf_log_dbg("Error creating eventdev %s",
> +					eventdev_name);
> +			return -1;
>  		}
>  		evdev = rte_event_dev_get_dev_id(eventdev_name);
>  		if (evdev < 0) {
> -			printf("Error finding newly created eventdev\n");
> -			return TEST_FAILED;
> +			ssovf_log_dbg("Error finding newly created eventdev");
> +			return -1;
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	return TEST_SUCCESS;
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static void
> @@ -177,31 +187,34 @@ _eventdev_setup(int mode)
>  					512, /* Use very small mbufs */
>  					rte_socket_id());
>  	if (!eventdev_test_mempool) {
> -		printf("ERROR creating mempool\n");
> -		return TEST_FAILED;
> +		ssovf_log_dbg("ERROR creating mempool");
> +		return -1;
>  	}
>  
>  	ret = rte_event_dev_info_get(evdev, &info);
> -	TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to get event dev info");
> -	TEST_ASSERT(info.max_num_events >= (int32_t)MAX_EVENTS,
> -			"max_num_events=%d < max_events=%d",
> -			info.max_num_events, MAX_EVENTS);
> +	RTE_TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(ret, "Failed to get event dev info");
> +	if (!(info.max_num_events >= (int32_t)MAX_EVENTS)) {
> +		ssovf_log_dbg("ERROR max_num_events=%d < max_events=%d",
> +				info.max_num_events, MAX_EVENTS);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
>  
I'm not sure how any of this is particularly adventageous.  You've replaced two
ASSERTION macros with one and an additional conditional.  The assert macros are
just a flexible as their were previously (which is to say, not overly so).  So
i'm not sure what the advantage of renaming them is.

Neil



More information about the dev mailing list