On 15 December 2014 at 18:39, Mike Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Add odp_time_x API tests
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes <[email protected]>
> ---
> test/validation/.gitignore | 1 +
> test/validation/Makefile.am | 4 +++-
> test/validation/odp_time.c | 50
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 test/validation/odp_time.c
>
> diff --git a/test/validation/.gitignore b/test/validation/.gitignore
> index 32834ae..3c81566 100644
> --- a/test/validation/.gitignore
> +++ b/test/validation/.gitignore
> @@ -5,3 +5,4 @@ odp_queue
> odp_crypto
> odp_schedule
> odp_shm
> +odp_time
> diff --git a/test/validation/Makefile.am b/test/validation/Makefile.am
> index d0b5426..8e78865 100644
> --- a/test/validation/Makefile.am
> +++ b/test/validation/Makefile.am
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ AM_LDFLAGS += -static
> if ODP_CUNIT_ENABLED
> TESTS = ${bin_PROGRAMS}
> check_PROGRAMS = ${bin_PROGRAMS}
> -bin_PROGRAMS = odp_init odp_queue odp_crypto odp_shm odp_schedule
> +bin_PROGRAMS = odp_init odp_queue odp_crypto odp_shm odp_schedule odp_time
> odp_init_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS)
> odp_queue_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS)
> odp_crypto_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -I$(srcdir)/crypto
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ odp_shm_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS)
> odp_shm_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS)
> odp_schedule_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS)
> odp_schedule_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS)
> +odp_time_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS)
> endif
>
> dist_odp_init_SOURCES = odp_init.c
> @@ -25,6 +26,7 @@ dist_odp_crypto_SOURCES =
> crypto/odp_crypto_test_async_inp.c \
> odp_crypto.c common/odp_cunit_common.c
> dist_odp_shm_SOURCES = odp_shm.c common/odp_cunit_common.c
> dist_odp_schedule_SOURCES = odp_schedule.c common/odp_cunit_common.c
> +dist_odp_time_SOURCES = odp_time.c common/odp_cunit_common.c
>
> #For Linux generic the unimplemented crypto API functions break the
> #regression TODO: https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=975
> diff --git a/test/validation/odp_time.c b/test/validation/odp_time.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..dfb304f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/test/validation/odp_time.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
> +/* Copyright (c) 2014, Linaro Limited
> + * All rights reserved.
> + *
> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> + */
> +
> +#include <odp.h>
> +#include "odp_cunit_common.h"
> +
> +#define TOLLERANCE 1
Speling?
> +
> +static void test_odp_time_basic(void)
> +{
> + uint64_t t1, t2, diff, cycles;
> + uint64_t upper_limit, lower_limit;
> +
> + t1 = odp_time_cycles();
> + CU_ASSERT(t1 > 0);
How can assert that t1 is already greater than 0?
> +
> + t2 = odp_time_cycles();
> + CU_ASSERT(t2 > 0);
> +
> + diff = odp_time_diff_cycles(t1, t2);
> + CU_ASSERT(diff > 0);
Two calls to odp_time_cycles() this close cannot be guaranteed to
return different values.
> +
> + t1 = 100;
> + cycles = odp_time_ns_to_cycles(t1);
> + CU_ASSERT(cycles > 0);
There's an implicit requirement of resolution here. Does this
requirement exist in the (API) spec?
What if the target only has e.g. a 1MHz cycle counter? Then 1 cycle is 1000ns.
> +
> + t2 = odp_time_cycles_to_ns(cycles);
> +
> + /* need to check within arithmetic tolerance */
> + upper_limit = t1 + TOLLERANCE;
> + lower_limit = t1 - TOLLERANCE;
> + printf("\nTolerance %" PRId64 " upper %" PRId64 " lower\n",
> + upper_limit, lower_limit);
> + printf("%" PRId64 " ns -> %" PRId64 " cycles -> %" PRId64 " ns\n",
> + t1, cycles, t2);
> + CU_ASSERT((t2 <= upper_limit) && (t2 >= lower_limit));
For this kind of test, I would probably check a cycle -> ns -> cycle
conversion instead. This should work as long as 1 cycle >= 1 ns.
Maybe we need to kinds of tests, one when cycle frequency >= 1GHz
(cycle resolution is <= 1ns) and another when cycle frequency <= 1GHz
(cycle resolution >= 1ns).
> +}
> +
> +CU_TestInfo test_odp_time[] = {
> + {"odp_time", test_odp_time_basic},
> + CU_TEST_INFO_NULL
> +};
> +
> +CU_SuiteInfo odp_testsuites[] = {
> + {"Time", NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, test_odp_time},
> + CU_SUITE_INFO_NULL
> +};
> --
> 2.1.0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
