[v2,3/5] test/hash: add lock free reader writer functional tests
Checks
Commit Message
Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free
APIs have.
Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
---
app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Comments
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:49 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
<honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
> These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free
> APIs have.
>
> Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused)) void *arg)
> }
>
> static int
> -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
> {
> unsigned int i;
>
> @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> else
> hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
>
> + hash_params.extra_flag = RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> if (use_htm)
> - hash_params.extra_flag =
> - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
> - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
> + if (rw_lf)
> + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF;
> else
> - hash_params.extra_flag =
> - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY;
>
> if (use_ext)
> hash_params.extra_flag |=
> @@ -195,7 +196,7 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> }
>
> static int
> -test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
> +test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_htm, int use_rw_lf, int use_ext)
This is a bit hard to read, please keep the same order than init_params.
> {
> unsigned int i;
> const void *next_key;
> @@ -214,7 +215,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
> rte_atomic64_init(&ginsertions);
> rte_atomic64_clear(&ginsertions);
>
> - if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> + if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_jhash) != 0)
> goto err;
>
> if (use_ext)
> @@ -229,6 +230,8 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
> tbl_rw_test_param.num_insert
> * slave_cnt;
>
> + printf("\nHTM = %d, RW-LF = %d, EXT-Table = %d\n",
> + use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_ext);
> printf("++++++++Start function tests:+++++++++\n");
>
> /* Fire all threads. */
> @@ -379,7 +382,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_perf(struct perf *perf_results, int use_htm,
> rte_atomic64_init(&gwrite_cycles);
> rte_atomic64_clear(&gwrite_cycles);
>
> - if (init_params(0, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> + if (init_params(0, use_htm, 0, use_jhash) != 0)
> goto err;
>
> /*
> @@ -700,7 +703,6 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
> * than writer threads. This is to timing either reader threads or
> * writer threads for performance numbers.
> */
> - int use_htm, use_ext;
The comments block just before is out of sync.
> unsigned int i = 0, core_id = 0;
>
> if (rte_lcore_count() < 3) {
> @@ -721,29 +723,41 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
>
> printf("Test read-write with Hardware transactional memory\n");
>
> - use_htm = 1;
> - use_ext = 0;
> + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
I didn't like those local variables.
But comments tend to get out of sync fairly easily, please remove too.
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 0) < 0)
> + return -1;
>
> - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 0) < 0)
> return -1;
>
> - use_ext = 1;
> - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 1) < 0)
> return -1;
>
> + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 1) < 0)
> + return -1;
> } else {
> printf("Hardware transactional memory (lock elision) "
> "is NOT supported\n");
> }
>
> printf("Test read-write without Hardware transactional memory\n");
> - use_htm = 0;
> - use_ext = 0;
> - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 0) < 0)
> + return -1;
> +
> + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 0) < 0)
> + return -1;
> +
> + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 1) < 0)
> return -1;
>
> - use_ext = 1;
> - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 1) < 0)
> return -1;
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:49 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
> <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
> > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free APIs
> > have.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> > ---
> > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
> > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c 100644
> > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
> test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
> > void *arg) }
> >
> > static int
> > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
> > {
> > unsigned int i;
> >
> > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
> use_jhash)
> > else
> > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
> >
> > + hash_params.extra_flag =
> > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > if (use_htm)
> > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
> > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
> > + if (rw_lf)
> > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF;
> > else
> > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY;
> >
> > if (use_ext)
> > hash_params.extra_flag |= @@ -195,7 +196,7 @@
> > init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash) }
> >
> > static int
> > -test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
> > +test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_htm, int use_rw_lf, int
> > +use_ext)
>
> This is a bit hard to read, please keep the same order than init_params.
It looks like it is better to change the init_params. Otherwise, the code in test_hash_rw_func_main becomes hard to read. See the comment below.
>
>
> > {
> > unsigned int i;
> > const void *next_key;
> > @@ -214,7 +215,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int
> use_htm)
> > rte_atomic64_init(&ginsertions);
> > rte_atomic64_clear(&ginsertions);
> >
> > - if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> > + if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_jhash) != 0)
> > goto err;
> >
> > if (use_ext)
> > @@ -229,6 +230,8 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int
> use_htm)
> > tbl_rw_test_param.num_insert
> > * slave_cnt;
> >
> > + printf("\nHTM = %d, RW-LF = %d, EXT-Table = %d\n",
> > + use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_ext);
> > printf("++++++++Start function tests:+++++++++\n");
> >
> > /* Fire all threads. */
> > @@ -379,7 +382,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_perf(struct perf *perf_results,
> int use_htm,
> > rte_atomic64_init(&gwrite_cycles);
> > rte_atomic64_clear(&gwrite_cycles);
> >
> > - if (init_params(0, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> > + if (init_params(0, use_htm, 0, use_jhash) != 0)
> > goto err;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -700,7 +703,6 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
> > * than writer threads. This is to timing either reader threads or
> > * writer threads for performance numbers.
> > */
> > - int use_htm, use_ext;
>
> The comments block just before is out of sync.
>
>
> > unsigned int i = 0, core_id = 0;
> >
> > if (rte_lcore_count() < 3) {
> > @@ -721,29 +723,41 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
> >
> > printf("Test read-write with Hardware transactional
> > memory\n");
> >
> > - use_htm = 1;
> > - use_ext = 0;
> > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
>
> I didn't like those local variables.
> But comments tend to get out of sync fairly easily, please remove too.
>
>
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 0) < 0)
> > + return -1;
> >
> > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 0) < 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > - use_ext = 1;
> > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 1) < 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 1) < 0)
> > + return -1;
> > } else {
> > printf("Hardware transactional memory (lock elision) "
> > "is NOT supported\n");
> > }
> >
> > printf("Test read-write without Hardware transactional memory\n");
> > - use_htm = 0;
> > - use_ext = 0;
> > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 0) < 0)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 0) < 0)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 1) < 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > - use_ext = 1;
> > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 1) < 0)
> > return -1;
The ordering of bits (0-0-0, 0-1-0, 0-0-1, 0-1-1) looks better here.
> >
> > return 0;
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
>
>
> --
> David Marchand
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 5:22 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
<Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:49 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
> > > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free APIs
> > > have.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c 100644
> > > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
> > test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
> > > void *arg) }
> > >
> > > static int
> > > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> > > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
> > > {
> > > unsigned int i;
> > >
> > > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
> > use_jhash)
> > > else
> > > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
> > >
> > > + hash_params.extra_flag =
> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > > if (use_htm)
> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
> > > + if (rw_lf)
> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF;
> > > else
> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY;
> > >
> > > if (use_ext)
> > > hash_params.extra_flag |= @@ -195,7 +196,7 @@
> > > init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash) }
> > >
> > > static int
> > > -test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
> > > +test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_htm, int use_rw_lf, int
> > > +use_ext)
> >
> > This is a bit hard to read, please keep the same order than init_params.
> It looks like it is better to change the init_params. Otherwise, the code in test_hash_rw_func_main becomes hard to read. See the comment below.
>
> >
> >
> > > {
> > > unsigned int i;
> > > const void *next_key;
> > > @@ -214,7 +215,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int
> > use_htm)
> > > rte_atomic64_init(&ginsertions);
> > > rte_atomic64_clear(&ginsertions);
> > >
> > > - if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> > > + if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_jhash) != 0)
> > > goto err;
> > >
> > > if (use_ext)
> > > @@ -229,6 +230,8 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int
> > use_htm)
> > > tbl_rw_test_param.num_insert
> > > * slave_cnt;
> > >
> > > + printf("\nHTM = %d, RW-LF = %d, EXT-Table = %d\n",
> > > + use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_ext);
> > > printf("++++++++Start function tests:+++++++++\n");
> > >
> > > /* Fire all threads. */
> > > @@ -379,7 +382,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_perf(struct perf *perf_results,
> > int use_htm,
> > > rte_atomic64_init(&gwrite_cycles);
> > > rte_atomic64_clear(&gwrite_cycles);
> > >
> > > - if (init_params(0, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
> > > + if (init_params(0, use_htm, 0, use_jhash) != 0)
> > > goto err;
> > >
> > > /*
> > > @@ -700,7 +703,6 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
> > > * than writer threads. This is to timing either reader threads or
> > > * writer threads for performance numbers.
> > > */
> > > - int use_htm, use_ext;
> >
> > The comments block just before is out of sync.
> >
> >
> > > unsigned int i = 0, core_id = 0;
> > >
> > > if (rte_lcore_count() < 3) {
> > > @@ -721,29 +723,41 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
> > >
> > > printf("Test read-write with Hardware transactional
> > > memory\n");
> > >
> > > - use_htm = 1;
> > > - use_ext = 0;
> > > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
> >
> > I didn't like those local variables.
> > But comments tend to get out of sync fairly easily, please remove too.
> >
> >
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 0) < 0)
> > > + return -1;
> > >
> > > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 0) < 0)
> > > return -1;
> > >
> > > - use_ext = 1;
> > > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 1) < 0)
> > > return -1;
> > >
> > > + /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 1) < 0)
> > > + return -1;
> > > } else {
> > > printf("Hardware transactional memory (lock elision) "
> > > "is NOT supported\n");
> > > }
> > >
> > > printf("Test read-write without Hardware transactional memory\n");
> > > - use_htm = 0;
> > > - use_ext = 0;
> > > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 0) < 0)
> > > + return -1;
> > > +
> > > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 0) < 0)
> > > + return -1;
> > > +
> > > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 1) < 0)
> > > return -1;
> > >
> > > - use_ext = 1;
> > > - if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
> > > + /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
> > > + if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 1) < 0)
> > > return -1;
> The ordering of bits (0-0-0, 0-1-0, 0-0-1, 0-1-1) looks better here.
Ok, forget my comment.
I just want to get rid of this series and we stop getting random
timeout in the CI.
I will take it as is and cleanup if I find some time later.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Marchand [mailto:david.marchand@redhat.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 8:42 AM
>To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
>Cc: Amit Gupta <agupta3@marvell.com>; Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>; Gobriel, Sameh <sameh.gobriel@intel.com>;
>thomas@monjalon.net; dev <dev@dpdk.org>; nd <nd@arm.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] test/hash: add lock free reader writer functional tests
>
>On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 5:22 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
><Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:49 PM Honnappa Nagarahalli
>> > <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
>> > > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free APIs
>> > > have.
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
>> > > ---
>> > > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
>> > > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> > > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c 100644
>> > > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
>> > test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
>> > > void *arg) }
>> > >
>> > > static int
>> > > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
>> > > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
>> > > {
>> > > unsigned int i;
>> > >
>> > > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
>> > use_jhash)
>> > > else
>> > > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
>> > >
>> > > + hash_params.extra_flag =
>> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
>> > > if (use_htm)
>> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
>> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
>> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
>> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
>> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
>> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
[Wang, Yipeng] Thanks for the patch Honnappa. Here I think we still need the RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY
Flag even with HTM.
Other commits in this series look good to me and seems David already applied.
Thanks!
<snip>
> >> > >
> >> > > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
> >> > > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free
> >> > > APIs have.
> >> > >
> >> > > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli
> >> > > <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> >> > > ---
> >> > > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
> >> > > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >> > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >> > >
> >> > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c
> >> > > 100644
> >> > > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
> >> > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
> >> > test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
> >> > > void *arg) }
> >> > >
> >> > > static int
> >> > > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
> >> > > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
> >> > > {
> >> > > unsigned int i;
> >> > >
> >> > > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
> >> > use_jhash)
> >> > > else
> >> > > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
> >> > >
> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag =
> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> >> > > if (use_htm)
> >> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
>
> [Wang, Yipeng] Thanks for the patch Honnappa. Here I think we still need the
> RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY
> Flag even with HTM.
I have made RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY depend on 'rw_lf' flag. The test case HTM + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY will still run when 'rw_lf' is set to 0.
>
> Other commits in this series look good to me and seems David already
> applied.
>
> Thanks!
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Honnappa Nagarahalli [mailto:Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 11:52 AM
>To: Wang, Yipeng1 <yipeng1.wang@intel.com>; David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
>Cc: Amit Gupta <agupta3@marvell.com>; Gobriel, Sameh <sameh.gobriel@intel.com>; thomas@monjalon.net; dev <dev@dpdk.org>;
>nd <nd@arm.com>; Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; nd <nd@arm.com>
>Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 3/5] test/hash: add lock free reader writer functional tests
>
><snip>
>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Add lock-free reader writer concurrency functional tests.
>> >> > > These tests will provide the same coverage that non lock-free
>> >> > > APIs have.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli
>> >> > > <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
>> >> > > ---
>> >> > > app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c | 58
>> >> > > +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>> >> > > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>> >> > >
>> >> > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> >> > > b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c index 635ed5a9f..a9429091c
>> >> > > 100644
>> >> > > --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> >> > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite.c
>> >> > > @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
>> >> > test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused))
>> >> > > void *arg) }
>> >> > >
>> >> > > static int
>> >> > > -init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
>> >> > > +init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
>> >> > > {
>> >> > > unsigned int i;
>> >> > >
>> >> > > @@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int
>> >> > use_jhash)
>> >> > > else
>> >> > > hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
>> >> > >
>> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag =
>> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
>> >> > > if (use_htm)
>> >> > > - hash_params.extra_flag =
>> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
>> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
>> >> > > - RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
>> >> > > + hash_params.extra_flag |=
>> >> > > + RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
>>
>> [Wang, Yipeng] Thanks for the patch Honnappa. Here I think we still need the
>> RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY
>> Flag even with HTM.
>I have made RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY depend on 'rw_lf' flag. The test case HTM +
>RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY will still run when 'rw_lf' is set to 0.
>
[Wang, Yipeng]
I see, thought was an "else if". It is correct then,
Thanks!
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_worker(__attribute__((unused)) void *arg)
}
static int
-init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
+init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int rw_lf, int use_jhash)
{
unsigned int i;
@@ -140,15 +140,16 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
else
hash_params.hash_func = rte_hash_crc;
+ hash_params.extra_flag = RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
if (use_htm)
- hash_params.extra_flag =
- RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT |
- RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
- RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
+ hash_params.extra_flag |=
+ RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_TRANS_MEM_SUPPORT;
+ if (rw_lf)
+ hash_params.extra_flag |=
+ RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY_LF;
else
- hash_params.extra_flag =
- RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY |
- RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_MULTI_WRITER_ADD;
+ hash_params.extra_flag |=
+ RTE_HASH_EXTRA_FLAGS_RW_CONCURRENCY;
if (use_ext)
hash_params.extra_flag |=
@@ -195,7 +196,7 @@ init_params(int use_ext, int use_htm, int use_jhash)
}
static int
-test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
+test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_htm, int use_rw_lf, int use_ext)
{
unsigned int i;
const void *next_key;
@@ -214,7 +215,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
rte_atomic64_init(&ginsertions);
rte_atomic64_clear(&ginsertions);
- if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
+ if (init_params(use_ext, use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_jhash) != 0)
goto err;
if (use_ext)
@@ -229,6 +230,8 @@ test_hash_readwrite_functional(int use_ext, int use_htm)
tbl_rw_test_param.num_insert
* slave_cnt;
+ printf("\nHTM = %d, RW-LF = %d, EXT-Table = %d\n",
+ use_htm, use_rw_lf, use_ext);
printf("++++++++Start function tests:+++++++++\n");
/* Fire all threads. */
@@ -379,7 +382,7 @@ test_hash_readwrite_perf(struct perf *perf_results, int use_htm,
rte_atomic64_init(&gwrite_cycles);
rte_atomic64_clear(&gwrite_cycles);
- if (init_params(0, use_htm, use_jhash) != 0)
+ if (init_params(0, use_htm, 0, use_jhash) != 0)
goto err;
/*
@@ -700,7 +703,6 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
* than writer threads. This is to timing either reader threads or
* writer threads for performance numbers.
*/
- int use_htm, use_ext;
unsigned int i = 0, core_id = 0;
if (rte_lcore_count() < 3) {
@@ -721,29 +723,41 @@ test_hash_rw_func_main(void)
printf("Test read-write with Hardware transactional memory\n");
- use_htm = 1;
- use_ext = 0;
+ /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 0) < 0)
+ return -1;
- if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
+ /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 0) < 0)
return -1;
- use_ext = 1;
- if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
+ /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 0, 1) < 0)
return -1;
+ /* htm = 1, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(1, 1, 1) < 0)
+ return -1;
} else {
printf("Hardware transactional memory (lock elision) "
"is NOT supported\n");
}
printf("Test read-write without Hardware transactional memory\n");
- use_htm = 0;
- use_ext = 0;
- if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
+ /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 0 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 0) < 0)
+ return -1;
+
+ /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 0 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 0) < 0)
+ return -1;
+
+ /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 0, ext = 1 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 0, 1) < 0)
return -1;
- use_ext = 1;
- if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(use_ext, use_htm) < 0)
+ /* htm = 0, rw_lf = 1, ext = 1 */
+ if (test_hash_readwrite_functional(0, 1, 1) < 0)
return -1;
return 0;