> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amber, Kumar <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday 27 March 2022 08:09
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Stokes, Ian <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> Ferriter, Cian <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Van Haaren, Harry
> <[email protected]>; Amber, Kumar <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH v2 0/4] Miniflow Extract Testing Improvements
>
> The patch-set introduces changes which would improve
> the testing of miniflow_extract for AVX512 based
> miniflow_extract optimizations whithout affecting scalar
> code path.
>
> Kumar Amber (4):
> dpif-netdev: Refactor per thread recirc data allocation.
> dpif-netdev: Refactor hashing function.
> Miniflow_extract: Refactor miniflow_extract into api.
> miniflow_extract: Add autovalidator support to miniflow_extract.
>
> lib/dpif-netdev-avx512.c | 2 +-
> lib/dpif-netdev-private-dpcls.h | 23 ++++++++++++++
> lib/dpif-netdev-private-dpif.c | 2 ++
> lib/dpif-netdev-private-dpif.h | 5 +++
> lib/dpif-netdev-private-extract.c | 6 ++--
> lib/dpif-netdev.c | 27 +---------------
> lib/flow.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> lib/flow.h | 6 +++-
> ofproto/ofproto.c | 10 +++---
> 9 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.25.1
Adding Ilya to the To: line since I looked at his feedback from the v1 of this
patch set to see if it was addressed.
Hi Amber and Ilya,
I've been looking at and testing this patch set to see what improvements it
brings to MFEX testing. I intentionally introduced errors to both generic and
AVX512 implementations of miniflow extract to check what the testing was
picking up on.
Thanks to the patch set, when I build with the
'--enable-mfex-default-autovalidator' at configure time, the intentionally
introduced errors in the AVX512 implementations of miniflow extract are found.
The 'make check' tests return 98 failures.
I looked closely at the 'flow extractor' unit test that Ilya mentioned
previously. It's in 'tests/test-flows.c', uses flows and packets generated from
'tests/flowgen.py' and can be run 2 ways:
make check TESTSUITEFLAGS='-k extractor -v'
OR
$OVS_DIR/tests/ovstest test-flows flows pcap
The intentionally introduced errors in the AVX512 implementations of miniflow
extract are found. All packets used in 'test/test-flows.c' are passed through
the autovalidator. The errors are reported by the miniflow extract
autovalidator, not the actual 'test/test-flows.c' checks.
I did have to fix one segfault happening in autovalidator because of the new
way in which this patch set uses it. I'll highlight the cause of this segfault
in the actual patch (patch 4/4).
So with these changes, we are testing the avx512 versions of the
miniflow_extract with all the packets we're testing the generic implementation
with. However, since we are not removing the MFEX related .at tests, we still
test the avx512 versions of miniflow extract with more packets than the generic
implementation.
@Ilya, I can see in your feedback on the v1, you would like to see the .at
miniflow extract traffic tests to be removed as well as the 'mfex_fuzzy.py'
file. I see value in what this patch set is doing, the non-fuzzy .at miniflow
extract test is covered by the 'test-flows.c' test since the same types of
packets are covered. The fuzz testing .at miniflow extract test still provides
additional value and removing it would reduce testing coverage.
This patch set adds value as is but I can see 2 shortcomings with the test
coverage of this patch set if we want to remove the .at miniflow extract
traffic tests and the 'mfex_fuzzy.py' file:
1. If the eventual goal is to remove the use of 'mfex_fuzzy.py', is
'flowgen.py' viable for all the AVX512 miniflow extract testing? I'm just
thinking about testing IPv6 in the future when AVX512 implementations are added
for it. 'flowgen.py' doesn't currently generate IPv6 packets. Is adding that
support easy? I think it's a great idea because we can benefit all
implementations of miniflow extract with improvements to 'flowgen.py', but I
find Scapy is the easiest tool for generating PCAPs.
2. We lose fuzzy style testing of the AVX512 miniflow extract implementations.
@Amber and Ilya, thoughts on the above shortcomings?
Thanks,
Cian
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
