Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()),
test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary result
files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup().
However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function
cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup()
has been run in each test function as follows:
cmt_resctrl_val()
cat_perf_miss_val()
mba_schemata_change()
mbm_bw_change()
Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file.
Signed-off-by: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c | 1 -
tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c | 2 --
tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c | 2 --
tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c | 2 --
4 files changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
index 1c5e90c63254..d1134f66469f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
@@ -221,7 +221,6 @@ int cat_perf_miss_val(int cpu_no, int n, char *cache_type)
kill(bm_pid, SIGKILL);
}
- cat_test_cleanup();
if (bm_pid)
umount_resctrlfs();
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c
index 8968e36db99d..b3b17fb876f4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c
@@ -139,7 +139,5 @@ int cmt_resctrl_val(int cpu_no, int n, char **benchmark_cmd)
if (ret)
return ret;
- cmt_test_cleanup();
-
return 0;
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c
index 1a1bdb6180cf..93ffacb416df 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c
@@ -166,7 +166,5 @@ int mba_schemata_change(int cpu_no, char *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd)
if (ret)
return ret;
- mba_test_cleanup();
-
return 0;
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c
index 38a3b3ad1c76..a453db4c221f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c
@@ -134,7 +134,5 @@ int mbm_bw_change(int span, int cpu_no, char *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd)
if (ret)
return ret;
- mbm_test_cleanup();
-
return 0;
}
--
2.27.0Hi Shaopeng, On 9/13/2022 6:51 PM, Shaopeng Tan wrote: > Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()), > test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary result > files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup(). > However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function before -> after? > cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() > has been run in each test function as follows: > cmt_resctrl_val() > cat_perf_miss_val() > mba_schemata_change() > mbm_bw_change() > > Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file. > Another good catch, thank you. > Signed-off-by: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c | 1 - > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c | 2 -- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c | 2 -- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c | 2 -- > 4 files changed, 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > index 1c5e90c63254..d1134f66469f 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > @@ -221,7 +221,6 @@ int cat_perf_miss_val(int cpu_no, int n, char *cache_type) > kill(bm_pid, SIGKILL); > } > > - cat_test_cleanup(); > if (bm_pid) > umount_resctrlfs(); > It makes it much easier to understand code if it is symmetrical. Since the files are created within cat_perf_miss_val() I think it would be better to perform the cleanup in the same function. So, keep this cleanup but remove the call from run_cat_test() instead. Similar for the cleanups below ... could you please keep them and instead remove the duplicate cleanup from run_cmt/mbm/mba_test() instead? When you do so, please be careful since it seems that there is (another!) bug where the cleanup is not done if the test fails. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > index 8968e36db99d..b3b17fb876f4 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > @@ -139,7 +139,5 @@ int cmt_resctrl_val(int cpu_no, int n, char **benchmark_cmd) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - cmt_test_cleanup(); > - > return 0; > } > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > index 1a1bdb6180cf..93ffacb416df 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > @@ -166,7 +166,5 @@ int mba_schemata_change(int cpu_no, char *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - mba_test_cleanup(); > - > return 0; > } > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > index 38a3b3ad1c76..a453db4c221f 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > @@ -134,7 +134,5 @@ int mbm_bw_change(int span, int cpu_no, char *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd) > if (ret) > return ret; > > - mbm_test_cleanup(); > - > return 0; > } Thank you Reinette
Hi Reinette, > On 9/13/2022 6:51 PM, Shaopeng Tan wrote: > > Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()), > > test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary result > > files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup(). > > However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function > > before -> after? I think it is "before". > > cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() > > has been run in each test function as follows: > > cmt_resctrl_val() > > cat_perf_miss_val() > > mba_schemata_change() > > mbm_bw_change() > > > > Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file. > > > > Another good catch, thank you. > > > Signed-off-by: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c | 1 - > > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c | 2 -- > > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c | 2 -- > > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c | 2 -- > > 4 files changed, 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > > b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > > index 1c5e90c63254..d1134f66469f 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c > > @@ -221,7 +221,6 @@ int cat_perf_miss_val(int cpu_no, int n, char > *cache_type) > > kill(bm_pid, SIGKILL); > > } > > > > - cat_test_cleanup(); > > if (bm_pid) > > umount_resctrlfs(); > > > > It makes it much easier to understand code if it is symmetrical. Since the files > are created within cat_perf_miss_val() I think it would be better to perform the > cleanup in the same function. So, keep this cleanup but remove the call from > run_cat_test() instead. > > Similar for the cleanups below ... could you please keep them and instead > remove the duplicate cleanup from run_cmt/mbm/mba_test() instead? > > When you do so, please be careful since it seems that there is (another!) bug > where the cleanup is not done if the test fails. Thanks for your advices, I will remove the duplicate cleanups from run_cmt/mbm/mba_test(). Best Regards, Shaopeng > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > > b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > > index 8968e36db99d..b3b17fb876f4 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c > > @@ -139,7 +139,5 @@ int cmt_resctrl_val(int cpu_no, int n, char > **benchmark_cmd) > > if (ret) > > return ret; > > > > - cmt_test_cleanup(); > > - > > return 0; > > } > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > > b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > > index 1a1bdb6180cf..93ffacb416df 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c > > @@ -166,7 +166,5 @@ int mba_schemata_change(int cpu_no, char > *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd) > > if (ret) > > return ret; > > > > - mba_test_cleanup(); > > - > > return 0; > > } > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > > b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > > index 38a3b3ad1c76..a453db4c221f 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c > > @@ -134,7 +134,5 @@ int mbm_bw_change(int span, int cpu_no, char > *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd) > > if (ret) > > return ret; > > > > - mbm_test_cleanup(); > > - > > return 0; > > } > > Thank you > > Reinette
Hi Shaopeng, On 9/27/2022 2:01 AM, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com wrote: > Hi Reinette, > >> On 9/13/2022 6:51 PM, Shaopeng Tan wrote: >>> Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()), >>> test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary result >>> files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup(). >>> However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function >> >> before -> after? > > I think it is "before". hmmm ... if cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() was run before ksft_print_msg() then there would be no test results to print, no? The current implementation runs cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() after ksft_print_msg() ... albeit twice. > >>> cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() >>> has been run in each test function as follows: >>> cmt_resctrl_val() >>> cat_perf_miss_val() >>> mba_schemata_change() >>> mbm_bw_change() >>> >>> Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file. >>> >> Reinette
Hi Reinette,
> On 9/27/2022 2:01 AM, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Hi Reinette,
> >
> >> On 9/13/2022 6:51 PM, Shaopeng Tan wrote:
> >>> Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()),
> >>> test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary
> >>> result files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup().
> >>> However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function
> >>
> >> before -> after?
> >
> > I think it is "before".
>
> hmmm ... if cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() was run before
> ksft_print_msg() then there would be no test results to print, no?
> The current implementation runs cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() after
> ksft_print_msg() ... albeit twice.
I am sorry I made a mistake in changelog.
It should be ksft_test_result() instead of ksft_print_msg().
Changelog:
Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()),
test results (“ok”/”not ok”) are printed by ksft_test_result() and then temporary result
files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup().
However, before running ksft_test_result(), function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup()
has been run in each test function as follows:
cmt_resctrl_val()
cat_perf_miss_val()
mba_schemata_change()
mbm_bw_change()
Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file.
An example of MBM test:
resctrl_tests.c
73 static void run_mbm_test(bool has_ben, char **benchmark_cmd, int span,
74 int cpu_no, char *bw_report)
75 {
87 res = mbm_bw_change(span, cpu_no, bw_report, benchmark_cmd);
88 ksft_test_result(!res, "MBM: bw change\n");
89 if ((get_vendor() == ARCH_INTEL) && res)
90 ksft_print_msg("Intel MBM may be inaccurate when Sub-NUMA Clustering is enabled. Check BIOS configuration.\n");
91 mbm_test_cleanup();
92 }
mbm_test.c
117 int mbm_bw_change(int span, int cpu_no, char *bw_report, char **benchmark_cmd)
118 {
138 ret = check_results(span);
142 mbm_test_cleanup();
145 }
50 static int check_results(int span)
51 {
82 ret = show_bw_info(bw_imc, bw_resc, span);
87 }
* Test results saved in file RESULT_FILE_NAME are printed by ksft_print_msg() in function show_bw_info().
Best Regards,
Shaopeng
Hi Shaopeng, On 9/28/2022 10:28 PM, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com wrote: >> On 9/27/2022 2:01 AM, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com wrote: >>>> On 9/13/2022 6:51 PM, Shaopeng Tan wrote: >>>>> Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()), >>>>> test results are printed by ksft_print_msg() and then temporary >>>>> result files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup(). >>>>> However, before running ksft_print_msg(), function >>>> >>>> before -> after? >>> >>> I think it is "before". >> >> hmmm ... if cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() was run before >> ksft_print_msg() then there would be no test results to print, no? >> The current implementation runs cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() after >> ksft_print_msg() ... albeit twice. > > > I am sorry I made a mistake in changelog. > It should be ksft_test_result() instead of ksft_print_msg(). > > Changelog: > Before exiting each test function(run_cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test()), > test results (“ok”/”not ok”) are printed by ksft_test_result() and then temporary result > files are cleaned by function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup(). > However, before running ksft_test_result(), function cmt/cat/mbm/mba_test_cleanup() > has been run in each test function as follows: > cmt_resctrl_val() > cat_perf_miss_val() > mba_schemata_change() > mbm_bw_change() > > Remove duplicate codes that clear each test result file. This is clear, thank you very much. Reinette
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.