[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] test/lpm: remove error checking in rcu qsbr perf

Dharmik Thakkar Dharmik.Thakkar at arm.com
Tue Nov 3 05:56:22 CET 2020



> On Nov 2, 2020, at 7:21 PM, Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> 
>> Remove redundant error checking for reader threads since they never return
>> error.
>> 
>> Fixes: eff30b59cc2e ("test/lpm: add RCU performance tests")
>> Cc: honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com
>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thakkar at arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang at arm.com>
>> ---
>> app/test/test_lpm_perf.c | 21 ++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c index
>> 55084816ab91..224c92fa3d65 100644
>> --- a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>> +++ b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>> @@ -554,11 +554,10 @@ test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(void)
>> 		__atomic_load_n(&gwrite_cycles, __ATOMIC_RELAXED)
>> 		/ TOTAL_WRITES);
>> 
>> -	/* Wait and check return value from reader threads */
>> 	writer_done = 1;
>> +	/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>> 	for (i = 2; i < num_cores; i++)
>> -		if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
>> -			goto error;
>> +		rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>> 
>> 	rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>> 	rte_free(rv);
>> @@ -603,10 +602,9 @@ test_lpm_rcu_perf_multi_writer(void)
>> 		/ TOTAL_WRITES);
>> 
>> 	writer_done = 1;
>> -	/* Wait and check return value from reader threads */
>> +	/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>> 	for (i = 2; i < num_cores; i++)
>> -		if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
>> -			goto error;
>> +		rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>> 
>> 	rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>> 
>> @@ -710,10 +708,9 @@ test_lpm_rcu_perf(void)
>> 		(double)total_cycles / TOTAL_WRITES);
>> 
>> 	writer_done = 1;
>> -	/* Wait and check return value from reader threads */
>> +	/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>> 	for (i = 0; i < num_cores; i++)
>> -		if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
>> -			goto error;
>> +		if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>                             ^^ Do we need the 'if' statement?

No, will remove in the next version.

>> 
>> 	rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>> 	rte_free(rv);
>> @@ -769,11 +766,9 @@ test_lpm_rcu_perf(void)
>> 		(double)total_cycles / TOTAL_WRITES);
>> 
>> 	writer_done = 1;
>> -	/* Wait and check return value from reader threads */
>> +	/* Wait until all readers have exited */
>> 	for (i = 0; i < num_cores; i++)
>> -		if (rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]) < 0)
>> -			printf("Warning: lcore %u not finished.\n",
>> -				enabled_core_ids[i]);
>> +		rte_eal_wait_lcore(enabled_core_ids[i]);
>> 
>> 	rte_lpm_free(lpm);
>> 
>> --
>> 2.17.1



More information about the dev mailing list