> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fijalkowski, Maciej <maciej.fijalkowski@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 3:10 PM
> To: Koikkara Reeny, Shibin <shibin.koikkara.reeny@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ast@xxxxxxxxxx; daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Karlsson, Magnus <magnus.karlsson@xxxxxxxxx>;
> bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; andrii@xxxxxxxxxx; Loftus, Ciara
> <ciara.loftus@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests: xsk: Update poll test cases
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 10:43:36AM +0100, Koikkara Reeny, Shibin wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2022 3:16 PM
> > > To: Koikkara Reeny, Shibin <shibin.koikkara.reeny@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ast@xxxxxxxxxx; daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Karlsson, Magnus
> > > <magnus.karlsson@xxxxxxxxx>; bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > andrii@xxxxxxxxxx; Loftus, Ciara <ciara.loftus@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests: xsk: Update poll test cases
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:57:12AM +0000, Shibin Koikkara Reeny wrote:
> > > > Poll test case was not testing all the functionality of the poll
> > > > feature in the testsuite. This patch update the poll test case
> > > > with 2 more testcases to check the timeout features.
> > > >
> > > > Poll test case have 4 sub test cases:
> > >
> > > Hi Shibin,
> > >
> > > Kinda not clear with count of added test cases, at first you say you
> > > add 2 more but then you mention something about 4 sub test cases.
> > >
> > > To me these are separate test cases.
> > >
> > Hi Maciej,
> >
> > Will update it in V2
> >
> > > >
> > > > 1. TEST_TYPE_RX_POLL:
> > > > Check if POLLIN function work as expect.
> > > >
> > > > 2. TEST_TYPE_TX_POLL:
> > > > Check if POLLOUT function work as expect.
> > >
> > > From run_pkt_test, I don't see any difference between 1 and 2. Why
> > > split then?
> > >
> >
> >
> > It was done to show which case exactly broke. If RX poll event or TX
> > poll event
> >
> > > >
> > > > 3. TEST_TYPE_POLL_RXQ_EMPTY:
> > >
> > > 3 and 4 don't match with the code here
> > > (TEST_TYPE_POLL_{R,T}XQ_TMOUT)
> > >
> > > > call poll function with parameter POLLIN on empty rx queue will
> > > > cause timeout.If return timeout then test case is pass.
> > > >
> >
> >
> > True but It was change to RXQ_EMPTY and TXQ_FULL from _TMOUT to
> make
> > it more clearer to what exactly is happening to cause timeout.
> >
> > > > 4. TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_FULL:
> > > > When txq is filled and packets are not cleaned by the kernel then
> > > > if we invoke the poll function with POLLOUT then it should trigger
> > > > timeout.If return timeout then test case is pass.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Shibin Koikkara Reeny
> > > > <shibin.koikkara.reeny@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c | 173
> > > > +++++++++++++++++------ tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.h
> > > > +++++++++++++++++|
> > > > 10 +-
> > > > 2 files changed, 139 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
> > > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
> > > > index 74d56d971baf..8ecab3a47c9e 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
> > > > @@ -424,6 +424,8 @@ static void __test_spec_init(struct test_spec
> > > > *test, struct ifobject *ifobj_tx,
> > > >
> > > > ifobj->xsk = &ifobj->xsk_arr[0];
> > > > ifobj->use_poll = false;
> > > > + ifobj->skip_rx = false;
> > > > + ifobj->skip_tx = false;
> > >
> > > Any chances of trying to avoid these booleans? Not that it's a hard
> > > nack, but the less booleans we spread around in this code the better.
> >
> >
> > Not sure if it is possible but using any other logic will make the
> > code more complex and less readable.
>
> How did you come with such judgement? You didn't even try the idea that I
> gave to you about having a testapp_validate_traffic() equivalent with a single
> thread.
>
Hi Maciej,
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
index 4394788829bf..0b58e026f2a2 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.c
@@ -1317,6 +1317,24 @@ static void *worker_testapp_validate_rx(void *arg)
pthread_exit(NULL);
}
+static int testapp_validate_traffic_txq_tmout(struct test_spec *test)
+{
+ struct ifobject *ifobj_tx = test->ifobj_tx;
+ pthread_t t0;
+
+ if (pthread_barrier_init(&barr, NULL, 2))
+ exit_with_error(errno);
+
+ test->current_step++;
+ pkt_stream_reset(ifobj_rx->pkt_stream);
+
+ pthread_create(&t0, NULL, ifobj_tx->func_ptr, test);
+ pthread_join(t0, NULL);
+
+ return !!test->fail;
+}
+
This is what you are suggesting do ?
My point is ifobj_tx->func_ptr calls worker_testapp_validate_tx() ==> send_pkts() ==> __send_pkts().
Normal case when poll timeout happen send_pkts() return TEST_FAILURE which is expected.
Test Case like TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_TMOUT and TEST_TYPE_POLL_RXQ_TMOUT when poll timeout happen
it should return TEST_PASS rather than TEST_FAILURE. How should I let the send_pkts()
to know what timeout type of test is running without a new variable or flag?
Then boolean skip_rx and skip_tx are both used in the send_pkts() and receive_pkts().
This is why I thought it might be complex but if you have new suggestion I open to try it.
> >
> > >
> > > > ifobj->use_fill_ring = true;
> > > > ifobj->release_rx = true;
> > > > ifobj->pkt_stream = test->pkt_stream_default; @@ -589,6
> > > +591,19 @@
> > > > static struct pkt_stream *pkt_stream_clone(struct xsk_umem_info
> > > *umem,
> > > > return pkt_stream_generate(umem, pkt_stream->nb_pkts,
> > > > pkt_stream->pkts[0].len); }
> > > >
> > > > +static void pkt_stream_invalid(struct test_spec *test, u32
> > > > +nb_pkts,
> > > > +u32 pkt_len) {
> > > > + struct pkt_stream *pkt_stream;
> > > > + u32 i;
> > > > +
> > > > + pkt_stream = pkt_stream_generate(test->ifobj_tx->umem,
> > > nb_pkts, pkt_len);
> > > > + for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++)
> > > > + pkt_stream->pkts[i].valid = false;
> > > > +
> > > > + test->ifobj_tx->pkt_stream = pkt_stream;
> > > > + test->ifobj_rx->pkt_stream = pkt_stream; }
> > >
> > > Please explain how this work, e.g. why you need to have to have
> > > invalid pkt stream + avoiding launching rx thread and why one of them is
> not enough.
> > >
> > > Personally I think this is not needed. When calling
> > > pkt_stream_generate(), validity of pkt is set based on length of packet vs
> frame size:
> > >
> > > if (pkt_len > umem->frame_size)
> > > pkt_stream->pkts[i].valid = false;
> > >
> > > so couldn't you use 2k frame size and bigger length of a packet?
> > >
> > This function was introduced for TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_FULL keep the TX
> > full and stop nofying the kernel that there is packet to cleanup.
> > So we are manually setting the packets to invalid. This help to keep
> > the __send_pkts() more generic and reduce the if conditions.
> > ex: xsk_ring_prod__submit() is not needed to be added inside if condition.
>
> I understand the intend behind it but what I was saying was that you have
> everything ready to be used without a need for introducing new functions.
> You could also try out what I suggested just to see if this makes things
> simpler.
>
Are you suggesting to do this ?
test->ifobj_tx->use_poll = true;
- pkt_stream_invalid(test, 2 * DEFAULT_PKT_CNT, PKT_SIZE);
+ test->ifobj_tx->umem->frame_size = 2048;
+ pkt_stream_replace(test, 2 * DEFAULT_PKT_CNT, 2048);
testapp_validate_traffic(test);
> >
> > You are right we don't need rx stream but thought it will be good to
> > keep as can be used for other features in future and will be more generic.
>
> If there are other features that would utilize this then let's introduce this
> then ;)
>
Got it.
> >
> > > > +
> > > > static void pkt_stream_replace(struct test_spec *test, u32
> > > > nb_pkts,
> > > > u32 pkt_len) {
> > > > struct pkt_stream *pkt_stream;
> > > > @@ -817,9 +832,9 @@ static int complete_pkts(struct
> > > > xsk_socket_info
> > > *xsk, int batch_size)
> > > > return TEST_PASS;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static int receive_pkts(struct ifobject *ifobj, struct pollfd
> > > > *fds)
> > > > +static int receive_pkts(struct ifobject *ifobj, struct pollfd
> > > > +*fds, bool skip_tx)
> > > > {
> > > > - struct timeval tv_end, tv_now, tv_timeout = {RECV_TMOUT, 0};
> > > > + struct timeval tv_end, tv_now, tv_timeout = {THREAD_TMOUT, 0};
> > > > u32 idx_rx = 0, idx_fq = 0, rcvd, i, pkts_sent = 0;
> > > > struct pkt_stream *pkt_stream = ifobj->pkt_stream;
> > > > struct xsk_socket_info *xsk = ifobj->xsk; @@ -843,17 +858,28 @@
> > > > static int receive_pkts(struct ifobject *ifobj, struct pollfd *fds)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > kick_rx(xsk);
> > > > + if (ifobj->use_poll) {
> > > > + ret = poll(fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > + exit_with_error(-ret);
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!ret) {
> > > > + if (skip_tx)
> > > > + return TEST_PASS;
> > > > +
> > > > + ksft_print_msg("ERROR: [%s] Poll timed
> > > out\n", __func__);
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > >
> > > > - rcvd = xsk_ring_cons__peek(&xsk->rx, BATCH_SIZE,
> > > &idx_rx);
> > > > - if (!rcvd) {
> > > > - if (xsk_ring_prod__needs_wakeup(&umem->fq)) {
> > >
> > > So now we don't check if fq needs to be woken up in non-poll case?
> > > I believe this is still needed so we get to the driver and pick fq
> > > entries. Prove me wrong of course if I'm missing something.
> >
> > xsk_ring_prod__needs_wakeup() ==> *r->flags &
> XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP;
> > This function only check if the flag is set or not and it is not
> > updating or triggering anything. In the original case if flag is set
> > then trigger the poll event and continue.
> > In this patch poll event is called in any case if it enter the if (!rcvd) is true..
> > We don't check if XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP is set or not.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > - ret = poll(fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > - if (ret < 0)
> > > > - exit_with_error(-ret);
> > > > }
> > > > - continue;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!(fds->revents & POLLIN))
> > > > + continue;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + rcvd = xsk_ring_cons__peek(&xsk->rx, BATCH_SIZE,
> > > &idx_rx);
> > > > + if (!rcvd)
> > > > + continue;
> > > > +
> > > > if (ifobj->use_fill_ring) {
> > > > ret = xsk_ring_prod__reserve(&umem->fq, rcvd,
> > > &idx_fq);
> > > > while (ret != rcvd) {
> > > > @@ -863,6 +889,7 @@ static int receive_pkts(struct ifobject
> > > > *ifobj, struct
> > > pollfd *fds)
> > > > ret = poll(fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > if (ret < 0)
> > > > exit_with_error(-ret);
> > > > + continue;
> > >
> > > Why continue here?
> >
> > You are right it is not needed. Will update in V2 patch. Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > > }
> > > > ret = xsk_ring_prod__reserve(&umem->fq,
> > > rcvd, &idx_fq);
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -900,13 +927,34 @@ static int receive_pkts(struct ifobject
> > > > *ifobj, struct
> > > pollfd *fds)
> > > > return TEST_PASS;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static int __send_pkts(struct ifobject *ifobject, u32 *pkt_nb)
> > > > +static int __send_pkts(struct ifobject *ifobject, u32 *pkt_nb,
> > > > +bool
> > > use_poll,
> > > > + struct pollfd *fds, bool timeout)
> > > > {
> > > > struct xsk_socket_info *xsk = ifobject->xsk;
> > > > - u32 i, idx, valid_pkts = 0;
> > > > + u32 i, idx, ret, valid_pkts = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + while (xsk_ring_prod__reserve(&xsk->tx, BATCH_SIZE, &idx) <
> > > BATCH_SIZE) {
> > > > + if (use_poll) {
> > > > + ret = poll(fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > + if (timeout) {
> > > > + if (ret < 0) {
> > > > + ksft_print_msg("DEBUG: [%s] Poll
> > > error %d\n",
> > > > + __func__, ret);
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > + }
> > > > + if (ret == 0)
> > > > + return TEST_PASS;
> > > > + break;
> > > > + }
> > > > + if (ret <= 0) {
> > > > + ksft_print_msg("DEBUG: [%s] Poll error
> > > %d\n",
> > > > + __func__, ret);
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > + }
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > - while (xsk_ring_prod__reserve(&xsk->tx, BATCH_SIZE, &idx) <
> > > BATCH_SIZE)
> > > > complete_pkts(xsk, BATCH_SIZE);
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > for (i = 0; i < BATCH_SIZE; i++) {
> > > > struct xdp_desc *tx_desc = xsk_ring_prod__tx_desc(&xsk-
> tx, idx
> > > >+ i); @@ -933,11 +981,27 @@ static int __send_pkts(struct ifobject
> > > >*ifobject, u32 *pkt_nb)
> > > >
> > > > xsk_ring_prod__submit(&xsk->tx, i);
> > > > xsk->outstanding_tx += valid_pkts;
> > > > - if (complete_pkts(xsk, i))
> > > > - return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > >
> > > > - usleep(10);
> > > > - return TEST_PASS;
> > > > + if (use_poll) {
> > > > + ret = poll(fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > + if (ret <= 0) {
> > > > + if (ret == 0 && timeout)
> > > > + return TEST_PASS;
> > > > +
> > > > + ksft_print_msg("DEBUG: [%s] Poll error %d\n",
>
> avoid debug prints in upstream patches
I can remove it or I can replace DEBUG as ERROR. What do you suggest?
>
> > > __func__, ret);
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > + }
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!timeout) {
> > > > + if (complete_pkts(xsk, i))
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > +
> > > > + usleep(10);
> > > > + return TEST_PASS;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + return TEST_CONTINUE;
> > >
> > > Why do you need this?
> > >
> >
> > __send_pkts is expected to return TEST_PASS or TEST_FAIL to send_pkts
> > function and if returned TEST_PASS then continue sending pkts and exit
> when all the packet are finished.
> > if returned TEST_FAILURE then test failed and return.
> >
> > For TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_TMOUT TEST_PASS is return value when timout
> > happened and should not sent anymore packets and break. But this will
> > break other test. So needed new return type TEST_CONTINUE to keep
> sending packets.
> >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > static void wait_for_tx_completion(struct xsk_socket_info *xsk)
> > > > @@
> > > > -948,29 +1012,33 @@ static void wait_for_tx_completion(struct
> > > > xsk_socket_info *xsk)
> > > >
> > > > static int send_pkts(struct test_spec *test, struct ifobject
> > > > *ifobject) {
> > > > + struct timeval tv_end, tv_now, tv_timeout = {THREAD_TMOUT, 0};
> > > > + bool timeout = test->ifobj_rx->skip_rx;
> > > > struct pollfd fds = { };
> > > > - u32 pkt_cnt = 0;
> > > > + u32 pkt_cnt = 0, ret;
> > > >
> > > > fds.fd = xsk_socket__fd(ifobject->xsk->xsk);
> > > > fds.events = POLLOUT;
> > > >
> > > > - while (pkt_cnt < ifobject->pkt_stream->nb_pkts) {
> > > > - int err;
> > > > -
> > > > - if (ifobject->use_poll) {
> > > > - int ret;
> > > > -
> > > > - ret = poll(&fds, 1, POLL_TMOUT);
> > > > - if (ret <= 0)
> > > > - continue;
> > > > + ret = gettimeofday(&tv_now, NULL);
> > > > + if (ret)
> > > > + exit_with_error(errno);
> > > > + timeradd(&tv_now, &tv_timeout, &tv_end);
> > >
> > > This logic of timer on Tx side is not mentioned anywhere in the
> > > commit message. Please try your best to describe all of the changes
> > > you're proposing.
> > >
> >
> > Will update in the commit message in V2 patch.
> >
> > > Also, couldn't this be a separate patch?
> > >
> > I prefer to keep it. But if you suggest otherwise I can remove.
>
> I'm not talking about removing this altogether, pulling this out to separate
> patch would make this one cleaner and reviewers job easier.
>
Sure. I agree will update in V3 patch.
> >
> > > >
> > > > - if (!(fds.revents & POLLOUT))
> > > > - continue;
> > > > + while (pkt_cnt < ifobject->pkt_stream->nb_pkts) {
> > > > + ret = gettimeofday(&tv_now, NULL);
> > > > + if (ret)
> > > > + exit_with_error(errno);
> > > > + if (timercmp(&tv_now, &tv_end, >)) {
> > > > + ksft_print_msg("ERROR: [%s] Send loop timed
> > > out\n", __func__);
> > > > + return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - err = __send_pkts(ifobject, &pkt_cnt);
> > > > - if (err || test->fail)
> > > > + ret = __send_pkts(ifobject, &pkt_cnt, ifobject->use_poll,
> > > &fds, timeout);
> > > > + if ((ret || test->fail) && !timeout)
> > > > return TEST_FAILURE;
> > > > + else if (ret == TEST_PASS && timeout)
> > > > + return ret;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > wait_for_tx_completion(ifobject->xsk);
> > > > @@ -1235,8 +1303,7 @@ static void *worker_testapp_validate_rx(void
> > > > *arg)
> > > >
> > > > pthread_barrier_wait(&barr);
> > > >
> > > > - err = receive_pkts(ifobject, &fds);
> > > > -
> > > > + err = receive_pkts(ifobject, &fds, test->ifobj_tx->skip_tx);
> > > > if (!err && ifobject->validation_func)
> > > > err = ifobject->validation_func(ifobject);
> > > > if (err) {
> > > > @@ -1265,17 +1332,21 @@ static int testapp_validate_traffic(struct
> > > test_spec *test)
> > > > pkts_in_flight = 0;
> > > >
> > > > /*Spawn RX thread */
> > > > - pthread_create(&t0, NULL, ifobj_rx->func_ptr, test);
> > > > -
> > > > - pthread_barrier_wait(&barr);
> > > > - if (pthread_barrier_destroy(&barr))
> > > > - exit_with_error(errno);
> > > > + if (!ifobj_rx->skip_rx) {
> > > > + pthread_create(&t0, NULL, ifobj_rx->func_ptr, test);
> > > > + pthread_barrier_wait(&barr);
> > > > + if (pthread_barrier_destroy(&barr))
> > > > + exit_with_error(errno);
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > /*Spawn TX thread */
> > > > - pthread_create(&t1, NULL, ifobj_tx->func_ptr, test);
> > > > + if (!ifobj_tx->skip_tx) {
> > > > + pthread_create(&t1, NULL, ifobj_tx->func_ptr, test);
> > > > + pthread_join(t1, NULL);
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > - pthread_join(t1, NULL);
> > > > - pthread_join(t0, NULL);
> > > > + if (!ifobj_rx->skip_rx)
> > > > + pthread_join(t0, NULL);
> > >
> > > Have you thought of a testapp_validate_traffic() variant with a
> > > single thread, either Tx or Rx? In this case probably would make
> > > everything clearer in the current pthread code. Also, wouldn't this drop
> the need for skip booleans?
> > >
> >
> > My suggestion will be to reuse the existing functions. If you suggest
> > otherwise I can look into it.
>
> Existing function wasn't designed for single thread execution which you need
> for your poll test cases. That's why I asked you to discover if having a function
> designed for single threaded tests is worth the hassle.
>
Still I think i will need a variable to let the send and receive function to see if the timeout is expect or an error.
I don't know if i am missing something. I am open to the suggestion.
> >
> > > >
> > > > return !!test->fail;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1548,10 +1619,28 @@ static void run_pkt_test(struct test_spec
> > > > *test, enum test_mode mode, enum test_
> > > >
> > > > pkt_stream_restore_default(test);
> > > > break;
> > > > - case TEST_TYPE_POLL:
> > > > + case TEST_TYPE_RX_POLL:
> > > > + test->ifobj_rx->use_poll = true;
> > > > + test_spec_set_name(test, "POLL_RX");
> > > > + testapp_validate_traffic(test);
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case TEST_TYPE_TX_POLL:
> > > > test->ifobj_tx->use_poll = true;
> > > > + test_spec_set_name(test, "POLL_TX");
> > > > + testapp_validate_traffic(test);
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_TMOUT:
> > > > + test_spec_set_name(test, "POLL_TXQ_FULL");
> > > > + test->ifobj_rx->skip_rx = true;
> > > > + test->ifobj_tx->use_poll = true;
> > > > + pkt_stream_invalid(test, 2 * DEFAULT_PKT_CNT, PKT_SIZE);
> > > > + testapp_validate_traffic(test);
> > > > + pkt_stream_restore_default(test);
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case TEST_TYPE_POLL_RXQ_TMOUT:
> > > > + test_spec_set_name(test, "POLL_RXQ_EMPTY");
> > > > + test->ifobj_tx->skip_tx = true;
> > > > test->ifobj_rx->use_poll = true;
> > > > - test_spec_set_name(test, "POLL");
> > > > testapp_validate_traffic(test);
> > > > break;
> > > > case TEST_TYPE_ALIGNED_INV_DESC:
> > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.h
> > > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.h
> > > > index 3d17053f98e5..0db7e0acccb2 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.h
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xskxceiver.h
> > > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> > > >
> > > > #define TEST_PASS 0
> > > > #define TEST_FAILURE -1
> > > > +#define TEST_CONTINUE 1
> > > > #define MAX_INTERFACES 2
> > > > #define MAX_INTERFACE_NAME_CHARS 7 #define
> > > > MAX_INTERFACES_NAMESPACE_CHARS 10 @@ -48,7 +49,7 @@
> > > #define
> > > > SOCK_RECONF_CTR 10 #define BATCH_SIZE 64 #define POLL_TMOUT
> > > 1000
> > > > -#define RECV_TMOUT 3
> > > > +#define THREAD_TMOUT 3
> > > > #define DEFAULT_PKT_CNT (4 * 1024) #define
> DEFAULT_UMEM_BUFFERS
> > > > (DEFAULT_PKT_CNT / 4) #define
> > > UMEM_SIZE
> > > > (DEFAULT_UMEM_BUFFERS * XSK_UMEM__DEFAULT_FRAME_SIZE)
> @@ -
> > > 68,7 +69,10
> > > > @@ enum test_type {
> > > > TEST_TYPE_RUN_TO_COMPLETION,
> > > > TEST_TYPE_RUN_TO_COMPLETION_2K_FRAME,
> > > > TEST_TYPE_RUN_TO_COMPLETION_SINGLE_PKT,
> > > > - TEST_TYPE_POLL,
> > > > + TEST_TYPE_RX_POLL,
> > > > + TEST_TYPE_TX_POLL,
> > > > + TEST_TYPE_POLL_RXQ_TMOUT,
> > > > + TEST_TYPE_POLL_TXQ_TMOUT,
> > > > TEST_TYPE_UNALIGNED,
> > > > TEST_TYPE_ALIGNED_INV_DESC,
> > > > TEST_TYPE_ALIGNED_INV_DESC_2K_FRAME,
> > > > @@ -145,6 +149,8 @@ struct ifobject {
> > > > bool tx_on;
> > > > bool rx_on;
> > > > bool use_poll;
> > > > + bool skip_rx;
> > > > + bool skip_tx;
> > > > bool busy_poll;
> > > > bool use_fill_ring;
> > > > bool release_rx;
> > > > --
> > > > 2.34.1
> > > >
