I agree. The test should only consider whether all the buffer that have been enqueued have been despatched by the scheduler. Fair scheduling cannot be tested using cunit, that should be taken during performance evaluation if needed.
Regards, Bala On 21 November 2014 15:55, Taras Kondratiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/21/2014 12:18 PM, Alexandru Badicioiu wrote: > >> Hi, >> the scheduling tests in odp_example were discussed some time ago and >> there was an agreement, at least for FSL and TI platforms, that fair >> scheduling assumed by the following loop: >> for (i = 0; i < QUEUE_ROUNDS; i++) { >> buf = odp_schedule_one(&queue, ODP_SCHED_WAIT); >> >> if (odp_queue_enq(queue, buf)) { >> ODP_ERR(" [%i] Queue enqueue failed.\n", thr); >> return -1; >> } >> } >> >> for an ATOMIC queue doesn't make sense as the behavior of an ATOMIC >> hardware queue is to be scheduled to the same core as long as there are >> packets in the queue and the core has room to dequeue them (other >> platforms please confirm or infirm). On my specific platform I can force >> this with a particular HW configuration, but this configuration >> effectively disables the use of POLL queues. >> I think we need scheduling tests for the most general case (SYNC_NONE >> and no assumption about how many buffers are scheduled to a particular >> core). >> > > I agree. Tests should not assume fair scheduling. > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
