[dpdk-dev,v2] test: add delay time in test alarm

  Because accuracy of timing to the microsecond is not guaranteed
in rte_eal_alarm_set, this function will not be called before
the requested time, but may be called a period of time
afterwards which can not be calculated. In order to ensure
test alarm running success, this patch added the delay time
before check the flag.

Signed-off-by: Qiming Yang <qiming.yang@intel.com>
---
v2 changes:
* fixed coding style problems
---
---
 test/test/test_alarm.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
  

Hi, 
 
> diff --git a/test/test/test_alarm.c b/test/test/test_alarm.c index
> ecb2f6d..cbae1a0 100644
> --- a/test/test/test_alarm.c
> +++ b/test/test/test_alarm.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ static int
>  test_multi_alarms(void)
>  {
>  	int rm_count = 0;
> +	int count = 0;
>  	cb_count.cnt = 0;
> 
>  	printf("Expect 6 callbacks in order...\n"); @@ -169,7 +170,10 @@
> test_multi_alarms(void)
>  		printf("Error, cancelling head-of-list leads to premature
> callback\n");
>  		return -1;
>  	}
> -	rte_delay_ms(10);
> +
> +	while (flag != 2 && count++ < 6)
> +		rte_delay_ms(10);
> +
>  	if (flag != 2) {
>  		printf("Error - expected callback not called\n");
>  		rte_eal_alarm_cancel(test_remove_in_callback, (void *)-1);
> @@ -212,7 +216,7 @@ test_alarm(void)
>  		printf("fail to set alarm callback\n");
>  		return -1;
>  	}
> -	while (flag == 0 && count ++ < 6)
> +	while (flag == 0 && count++ < 20)
>  		rte_delay_ms(RTE_TEST_CHECK_PERIOD);
> 

What's the criteria to delay 20* RTE_TEST_CHECK_PERIOD ms? Add more comments?

>  	if (flag == 0){
> --
> 2.7.4

Overall comment is to replace numeric with macro.
  

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chen, Jing D
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:29 PM
> To: Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] test: add delay time in test alarm
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > diff --git a/test/test/test_alarm.c b/test/test/test_alarm.c index
> > ecb2f6d..cbae1a0 100644
> > --- a/test/test/test_alarm.c
> > +++ b/test/test/test_alarm.c
> > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ static int
> >  test_multi_alarms(void)
> >  {
> >  	int rm_count = 0;
> > +	int count = 0;
> >  	cb_count.cnt = 0;
> >
> >  	printf("Expect 6 callbacks in order...\n"); @@ -169,7 +170,10 @@
> > test_multi_alarms(void)
> >  		printf("Error, cancelling head-of-list leads to premature
> > callback\n");
> >  		return -1;
> >  	}
> > -	rte_delay_ms(10);
> > +
> > +	while (flag != 2 && count++ < 6)
> > +		rte_delay_ms(10);

The count can be replaced with macro, but the delay 10 ms is based on the alarm time set before.
rte_eal_alarm_set(10 * US_PER_MS, test_remove_in_callback, (void *)1);

> > +
> >  	if (flag != 2) {
> >  		printf("Error - expected callback not called\n");
> >  		rte_eal_alarm_cancel(test_remove_in_callback, (void *)-1);
> @@
> > -212,7 +216,7 @@ test_alarm(void)
> >  		printf("fail to set alarm callback\n");
> >  		return -1;
> >  	}
> > -	while (flag == 0 && count ++ < 6)
> > +	while (flag == 0 && count++ < 20)
> >  		rte_delay_ms(RTE_TEST_CHECK_PERIOD);
> >
> 
> What's the criteria to delay 20* RTE_TEST_CHECK_PERIOD ms? Add more
> comments?
> 
> >  	if (flag == 0){
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> 
> Overall comment is to replace numeric with macro.