[dts] [PATCH] rx interrupt: Fixed test case

[Tu, Lijuan]

Hi Owen,

Reduce the number of invocations is a good idea, and your design is more perfect for a common case. But we still need to consider the boundary, the minimum and the maximum queue number. I really suggest we might get a random number from the minimum, maximum, and normal queue number, if then invocation is reduced, besides boundary checking is covered. Definitely we will run test for a long time not only once.

thanks

From: dts <dts-bounces at dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Owen Hilyard
Sent: 2020年9月3日 2:42
To: Ma, LihongX <lihongx.ma at intel.com>
Cc: dts at dpdk.org; Zhang, Yuwei1 <yuwei1.zhang at intel.com>; changqingx.wu at intel.com; Xiao, QimaiX <qimaix.xiao at intel.com>; Hunt, David <david.hunt at intel.com>; lylavoie at iol.unh.edu
Subject: Re: [dts] [PATCH] rx interrupt: Fixed test case

Hello
I'm able to see a material difference between what I've suggested and what the prior test case did. I was attempting to reduce the number of invocations of a pmd during the test, since those invocations are time consuming and, from what I measured, made up the majority of the runtime of the test. Is there a reason why all queues and port's can't be opened at the same time and then ignored until they are needed? The way I re-did the configs was designed to create all possible combinations of settings in the format that was originally there. Are all 3 invocations of the pmd needed or is it possible to merge those and throw out my other changes? Most of my changes were done because I was already planning on submitting a patch to remove the extra invocations and aren't as important.

Thanks for your help
Owen

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 10:02 PM Ma, LihongX <lihongx.ma at intel.com<mailto:lihongx.ma at intel.com>> wrote:
Hi, Owen
I think the change of the plan is not make sense, the case ' PF interrupt pmd with different queue' is want to test the interrupt on different queue,
The original case will test the queue on min number, max number and normal number(between minimum and maximum), but your patch will only test one situation.


Regards,
Ma,lihong

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dts <dts-bounces at dpdk.org<mailto:dts-bounces at dpdk.org>> On Behalf Of Owen Hilyard
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:04 PM
> To: dts at dpdk.org<mailto:dts at dpdk.org>
> Cc: Zhang, Yuwei1 <yuwei1.zhang at intel.com<mailto:yuwei1.zhang at intel.com>>; changqingx.wu at intel.com<mailto:changqingx.wu at intel.com>; Xiao,
> QimaiX <qimaix.xiao at intel.com<mailto:qimaix.xiao at intel.com>>; Hunt, David <david.hunt at intel.com<mailto:david.hunt at intel.com>>;
> lylavoie at iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie at iol.unh.edu>; Owen Hilyard <ohilyard at iol.unh.edu<mailto:ohilyard at iol.unh.edu>>
> Subject: [dts] [PATCH] rx interrupt: Fixed test case
>
> fixed test case issues with eal params
> removed extra instances of l3fwd-power
>
> Signed-off-by: Owen Hilyard <ohilyard at iol.unh.edu<mailto:ohilyard at iol.unh.edu>>
> ---
>  test_plans/interrupt_pmd_test_plan.rst | 58 +++++++++-----------
>  tests/TestSuite_interrupt_pmd.py       | 73 ++++++++++++++------------
>  2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/test_plans/interrupt_pmd_test_plan.rst
> b/test_plans/interrupt_pmd_test_plan.rst
> index cb8b2f1..1f8816d 100644
> --- a/test_plans/interrupt_pmd_test_plan.rst
> +++ b/test_plans/interrupt_pmd_test_plan.rst
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dts/attachments/20200909/6906b3e8/attachment.html>