I am unsure if I need to pay attention to this for 0.7.0 On 7 January 2015 at 04:39, Ciprian Barbu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Bill Fischofer > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it's something we need to discuss during the sync call. > > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Mike Holmes <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> 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. > > Sorry, I couldn't join you in the ODP call yesterday, mind if you give > a brief update on what was decided? > > >>> > >>> 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 > > > > > -- *Mike Holmes* Linaro Sr Technical Manager LNG - ODP
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
