Hi llya, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:50 AM > To: Amber, Kumar <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; Phelan, Michael <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v1] system-dpdk.at: Add ignore warning for > context switches in CI. > > On 2/28/22 19:23, Amber, Kumar wrote: > > Hi IIya, > > > > Thanks for the comments > > > >> > >> > >> Hi. These warnings are more about long poll intervals and that > >> should not happen during tests. Which test is causing this problem? > >> > >> Long poll intervals usually indicate a problem with the test itself. > >> Usual suspect is poor pinning of PMD threads. > >> > >> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > > > > Fuzzy testing for MFEX , I agree but the cores of the test were chosen such > that the cores are always available on any available Setup. > > Thus, this is a side-effect, but it guarantees that the test won't > > fail on most of the setups. Suppressing warnings is A good tradeoff. > > Why can't we use dummy numa for this test? This will avoid actual pinning of > the threads keeping them available for kernel scheduling. > We're not testing performance here after all. > > Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
Based on the discussion and feedback, we have tried to remove the complexity of the DPIF itself from testing MFEX. To Make it simpler to understand and introduce testing more complex traffic type and improvements to the testing of mfex. Please have a look at the patch sets and feedback is always great to improve testing. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?series=287947 Regards Amber _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
