[PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for queue configure

[Maxime Coquelin]

On 10/19/23 14:12, Chautru, Nicolas wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin at redhat.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 10:47 AM
>> To: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chautru at intel.com>; Vargas, Hernan
>> <hernan.vargas at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org; gakhil at marvell.com; Rix, Tom
>> <trix at redhat.com>
>> Cc: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for queue configure
>>
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> On 10/19/23 10:41, Chautru, Nicolas wrote:
>>> Hi Maxime,
>>>
>>> Do we really want to make these kind of changes on to the stable release, it
>> tends to artificially increase the amount of churn on the stable release which
>> can be counterproductive for such changes which don't add much value if any
>> to user/developper.
>>> Happy to follow your suggestion but a general feedback is lack of appetite for
>> very large amount of changes in stable patches which inhibit adoption, so
>> would expect to put things there that we would genuinely flag as a bug.
>>> Kindly share your thoughts.
>>
>> Checking for configuration failure in a test application is quite useful in my
>> opinion, as it can help catching regressions, isn't it?
> 
> I don’t personally think this (or for other commit on that serie) hits that bar for being required in stable release. This ends up being counterproductive having stable release with a huge amount of commits that are not really required, and it ends up being a reason for people not to move to stable release.
> But if you are really convinced, ok to follow your reco.

Adding LTS maintainers if they want to step in.

Personally, I think ot should be backported.

Maxime

>>
>> Maxime
>>> Thanks
>>> Nic
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin at redhat.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 9:43 PM
>>>> To: Vargas, Hernan <hernan.vargas at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org;
>>>> gakhil at marvell.com; Rix, Tom <trix at redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: Chautru, Nicolas <nicolas.chautru at intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z
>>>> <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] test/bbdev: assert failed test for
>>>> queue configure
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/29/23 20:13, Hernan Vargas wrote:
>>>>> Stop test if rte_bbdev_queue_configure fails to configure queue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hernan Vargas <hernan.vargas at intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c | 3 ++-
>>>>>     1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c
>>>>> b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c index 65805977aead..cf224dca5d04
>>>>> 100644
>>>>> --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c
>>>>> +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev.c
>>>>> @@ -366,7 +366,8 @@ test_bbdev_configure_stop_queue(void)
>>>>>     	 * - queue should be started if deferred_start ==
>>>>>     	 */
>>>>>     	ts_params->qconf.deferred_start = 0;
>>>>> -	rte_bbdev_queue_configure(dev_id, queue_id, &ts_params->qconf);
>>>>> +	TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(rte_bbdev_queue_configure(dev_id, queue_id,
>>>> &ts_params->qconf),
>>>>> +			"Failed test for rte_bbdev_queue_configure");
>>>>>     	rte_bbdev_start(dev_id);
>>>>>
>>>>>     	TEST_ASSERT_SUCCESS(return_value =
>>>> rte_bbdev_queue_info_get(dev_id,
>>>>
>>>> If should be a fix IMO.
>>>> With fixes tag added and stable cc'ed:
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin at redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Maxime
>>>
>