[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/15] Unit tests fixes for CI

[Bruce Richardson]

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:41:21PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
>    On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 1:18 PM Bruce Richardson
>    <[1]bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
> 
>      On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:46:03PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
>      >    On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:02 PM Bruce Richardson
>      >    <[1][2]bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >      On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 08:42:15AM +0200, David Marchand
>      wrote:
>      >      > This is a joint effort to make the unit tests ready for CI.
>      >      > The first patches are fixes that I had accumulated.
>      >      > Then the second part of the series focuses on skipping
>      tests when
>      >      some
>      >      > requirements are not fulfilled so that we can start them in
>      a
>      >      restrained
>      >      > environment like Travis virtual machines that gives us two
>      cores
>      >      and does
>      >      > not have specific hw devices.
>      >      >
>      >      > We are still not ready for enabling those tests in Travis.
>      >      > At least, the following issues remain:
>      >      > - some fixes on librte_acl have not been merged yet [1],
>      >      > - the tests on --file-prefix are still ko, and have been
>      isolated
>      >      in a
>      >      >   test that we could disable while waiting for the fixes,
>      >      > - rwlock_autotest and hash_readwrite_lf_autotest are taking
>      a
>      >      little more
>      >      >   than 10s,
>      >      > - librte_table unit test crashes on ipv6 [2],
>      >      > - the "perf" tests are taking way too long for my taste,
>      >      > - the shared build unit tests all fail when depending on
>      mempool
>      >      since
>      >      >   the mempool drivers are not loaded,
>      >      >
>      >      For the autotest app shared builds, it is probably worthwhile
>      >      linking in
>      >      all drivers explicitly to avoid issues like this.
>      >
>      >    Yes, I'll look into this.
>      >    While at it, do you know why the i40e and ixgbe drivers are
>      linked to
>      >    app/test in meson?
>      >    --
>      There are unit tests for the device-specific functions in those
>      drivers, so
>      they need to be given at link time.
> 
>    For testpmd, I can understand.
>    But I can't see code for driver specific apis in app/test.
>    It looks like a copy/paste error when adding meson support.
>    --
Ok, could be. Simple question is does it still build ok if you remove them?

/Bruce