On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 12:19:49PM +0100, Santosh Shukla wrote:
> On 18 August 2014 16:30, Stuart Haslam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 08:41:00AM +0100, Santosh Shukla wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure it's worth adding an example application that does nothing.
> > Isolation is not be something the application needs explicit knowledge
> > of so having an example app demonstrating it is a bit odd. All of the
> > existing examples / tests should be capable of being run isolated.
> >
> > For this test you could start with odp_example as it has no dependencies
>
> Not entirely true and I did thought about using odp_example.
> odp_example does use timer api (clock_gettime) which I don't want to
> call from isolated thread. Therefore choose to keep dummy (explicitly
> mentioned in writeup) thread looping for x time.
>
OK fair enough, so the odp_example would currently fail this test
because there's a problem with the linu-generic implementation of the
timers, this is a known issue and should be fixed at some point.
> More appropriate test application is l2fwd, where I am doing isolation.
>
OK, can you send patches for that instead? :)
> There is a readme (in next patch) which very much informs NOT to use
> odp method of cpuset for thread pinning instead use script.
Yeah I read that - it doesn't say why not though.
> I could
> choose to add job enqueue/dequeue in while loop But in next patch.
I don't think that's the right direction to head. Given that any of the
tests or examples should be capable of running isolated, if we were to
have a specific isolation test then it would just end up replicating all
of the other tests. It would be better to just run the existing tests
on isolated cores. As you say that's not possible at the minute, but it
should be a goal - and the easiest way to start is by picking an
existing test that does work on isolated cores.
> >
> > I wonder if changing odp_linux_pthread_create to take an array of cores
> > rather than just the first core is a better way to go. A quick grep
> > through the existing examples / tests shows almost all callers provide 1
> > for the number of cores, so it's not currently being used as expected.
> >
>
> Nope. Not in this case, I want to create thread on any of cores based
> on arg_list, That may be look like this -
> -l 2,3,5,6 OR -l 3,5,6,7
>
> Also changing the order helps me to test my isolation script.
>
Yes, what I was suggesting would make that easier. Instead of looping
over num_workers and setting first_core and num for each iteration you
just pass in an array of core numbers that you want threads started on,
e.g.;
odp_linux_pthread_create(thread_tbl, num_workers, args.core_num,
run_thread, NULL);
Where args.core_num is just what you currently have as args.core_name
but stored as an integer.
--
Stuart.
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
