On 7 January 2015 at 20:41, Mike Holmes <[email protected]> wrote: > I am unsure if I need to pay attention to this for 0.7.0 We need to have a decision (and implementation) for ODP 1.0 though. Scheduling and its semantics are important aspects of ODP.
> > 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 > _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
