Should a bug be made to track a needed change or is it important for 1.0 and needs to be in the delta doc ?
On 6 January 2015 at 08:40, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> wrote: > Caches should be transparent. While this may be needed here, it's a poor > set of semantics to expose as part of the formal APIs. This is definitely > something we need to address. My suggestion is that a odp_schedule_pause() > should cause an implicit cache flush if the implementation is using a > scheduling cache. That way any cache being used is truly transparent and > moreover there won't be unnecessary delays in event processing since who > knows how long a pause may last? Clearly it won't be brief since otherwise > the application would not have bothered with a pause/resume in the first > place. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Ciprian Barbu <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Jerin Jacob >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:10:11PM +0200, Ciprian Barbu wrote: >> >> Signed-off-by: Ciprian Barbu <[email protected]> >> >> --- >> >> test/validation/odp_schedule.c | 63 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> >> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/test/validation/odp_schedule.c >> b/test/validation/odp_schedule.c >> >> index 31be742..bdbcf77 100644 >> >> --- a/test/validation/odp_schedule.c >> >> +++ b/test/validation/odp_schedule.c >> >> @@ -11,9 +11,11 @@ >> >> #define MSG_POOL_SIZE (4*1024*1024) >> >> #define QUEUES_PER_PRIO 16 >> >> #define BUF_SIZE 64 >> >> -#define TEST_NUM_BUFS 100 >> >> +#define NUM_BUFS 100 >> >> #define BURST_BUF_SIZE 4 >> >> -#define TEST_NUM_BUFS_EXCL 10000 >> >> +#define NUM_BUFS_EXCL 10000 >> >> +#define NUM_BUFS_PAUSE 1000 >> >> +#define NUM_BUFS_BEFORE_PAUSE 10 >> >> >> >> #define GLOBALS_SHM_NAME "test_globals" >> >> #define MSG_POOL_NAME "msg_pool" >> >> @@ -229,7 +231,7 @@ static void schedule_common(odp_schedule_sync_t >> sync, int num_queues, >> >> args.sync = sync; >> >> args.num_queues = num_queues; >> >> args.num_prio = num_prio; >> >> - args.num_bufs = TEST_NUM_BUFS; >> >> + args.num_bufs = NUM_BUFS; >> >> args.num_cores = 1; >> >> args.enable_schd_multi = enable_schd_multi; >> >> args.enable_excl_atomic = 0; /* Not needed with a single core >> */ >> >> @@ -261,9 +263,9 @@ static void parallel_execute(odp_schedule_sync_t >> sync, int num_queues, >> >> thr_args->num_queues = num_queues; >> >> thr_args->num_prio = num_prio; >> >> if (enable_excl_atomic) >> >> - thr_args->num_bufs = TEST_NUM_BUFS_EXCL; >> >> + thr_args->num_bufs = NUM_BUFS_EXCL; >> >> else >> >> - thr_args->num_bufs = TEST_NUM_BUFS; >> >> + thr_args->num_bufs = NUM_BUFS; >> >> thr_args->num_cores = globals->core_count; >> >> thr_args->enable_schd_multi = enable_schd_multi; >> >> thr_args->enable_excl_atomic = enable_excl_atomic; >> >> @@ -459,6 +461,56 @@ static void test_schedule_multi_1q_mt_a_excl(void) >> >> ENABLE_EXCL_ATOMIC); >> >> } >> >> >> >> +static void test_schedule_pause_resume(void) >> >> +{ >> >> + odp_queue_t queue; >> >> + odp_buffer_t buf; >> >> + odp_queue_t from; >> >> + int i; >> >> + int local_bufs = 0; >> >> + >> >> + queue = odp_queue_lookup("sched_0_0_n"); >> >> + CU_ASSERT(queue != ODP_QUEUE_INVALID); >> >> + >> >> + pool = odp_buffer_pool_lookup(MSG_POOL_NAME); >> >> + CU_ASSERT_FATAL(pool != ODP_BUFFER_POOL_INVALID); >> >> + >> >> + >> >> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_BUFS_PAUSE; i++) { >> >> + buf = odp_buffer_alloc(pool); >> >> + CU_ASSERT(buf != ODP_BUFFER_INVALID); >> >> + odp_queue_enq(queue, buf); >> >> + } >> >> + >> >> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_BUFS_BEFORE_PAUSE; i++) { >> >> + buf = odp_schedule(&from, ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT); >> >> + CU_ASSERT(from == queue); >> >> + odp_buffer_free(buf); >> >> + } >> >> + >> >> + odp_schedule_pause(); >> >> + >> >> + while (1) { >> >> + buf = odp_schedule(&from, ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT); >> >> + if (buf == ODP_BUFFER_INVALID) >> >> + break; >> >> + >> >> + CU_ASSERT(from == queue); >> >> + odp_buffer_free(buf); >> >> + local_bufs++; >> >> + } >> >> + >> >> + CU_ASSERT(local_bufs < NUM_BUFS_PAUSE - NUM_BUFS_BEFORE_PAUSE); >> > >> > Whats is the expected behavior here, Shouldn't it be >> CU_ASSERT(local_bufs == 0) ? >> > meaning, the complete pause ? >> >> Sorry about the delay, I've been playing around with mutt and I must >> have accidentally marked this email as read. >> The explanation here is that after pausing the scheduling, there might >> still be locally reserved buffers (see the odp_schedule_pause >> documentation). For linux-generic for instance the scheduler dequeues >> buffers in bursts, odp_scheduler_pause only stops further dequeues, >> buffers may still be in the 'reservoirs'. With that in mind, the check >> above makes sure that after pausing only a limited number of packets >> are still scheduled, or else said pausing seems to work, not all >> packets being drained. >> >> > >> >> + >> >> + odp_schedule_resume(); >> >> + >> >> + for (i = local_bufs + NUM_BUFS_BEFORE_PAUSE; i < NUM_BUFS_PAUSE; >> i++) { >> >> + buf = odp_schedule(&from, ODP_SCHED_WAIT); >> >> + CU_ASSERT(from == queue); >> >> + odp_buffer_free(buf); >> >> + } >> >> +} >> >> + >> >> static int create_queues(void) >> >> { >> >> int i, j, prios; >> >> @@ -594,6 +646,7 @@ struct CU_TestInfo test_odp_schedule[] = { >> >> {"schedule_multi_mq_mt_prio_a", >> test_schedule_multi_mq_mt_prio_a}, >> >> {"schedule_multi_mq_mt_prio_o", >> test_schedule_multi_mq_mt_prio_o}, >> >> {"schedule_multi_1q_mt_a_excl", >> test_schedule_multi_1q_mt_a_excl}, >> >> + {"schedule_pause_resume", test_schedule_pause_resume}, >> >> CU_TEST_INFO_NULL, >> >> }; >> >> >> >> -- >> >> 1.8.3.2 >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > > -- *Mike Holmes* Linaro Sr Technical Manager LNG - ODP
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
