test/table_autotest: Decrease memory requirement
Checks
Commit Message
This patch reduces the memory footprint of tables for the unit test.
Lower memory footprint means the test now passes when trying to allocate
the tables.
Signed-off-by: Michael Santana <msantana@redhat.com>
---
app/test/test_table_tables.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Comments
Hello Michael,
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:31 PM Michael Santana <msantana@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> This patch reduces the memory footprint of tables for the unit test.
> Lower memory footprint means the test now passes when trying to allocate
> the tables.
This is mainly for tests in CI, might be worth mentionning in the commitlog.
Do you have a rough estimate of how the need in memory changes with this patch?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Santana [mailto:msantana@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 10:32 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>; Michael Santana
> Francisco <msantana@redhat.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] test/table_autotest: Decrease memory requirement
>
> This patch reduces the memory footprint of tables for the unit test.
> Lower memory footprint means the test now passes when trying to allocate
> the tables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Santana <msantana@redhat.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_table_tables.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
Acked-by: Cristian Dumitrescu <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
On 7/26/19 3:09 AM, David Marchand wrote:
> Hello Michael,
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:31 PM Michael Santana <msantana@redhat.com> wrote:
>> This patch reduces the memory footprint of tables for the unit test.
>> Lower memory footprint means the test now passes when trying to allocate
>> the tables.
> This is mainly for tests in CI, might be worth mentionning in the commitlog.
will update
>
> Do you have a rough estimate of how the need in memory changes with this patch?
Based on the equation on lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c:317, that particular
allocation went from 2.2GB to ~300MB
>
>
@@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ test_table_lpm_ipv6(void)
struct rte_table_lpm_ipv6_params lpm_params = {
.name = "LPM",
.n_rules = 1 << 24,
- .number_tbl8s = 1 << 21,
+ .number_tbl8s = 1 << 18,
.entry_unique_size = entry_size,
.offset = APP_METADATA_OFFSET(32)
};
@@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ test_table_lpm_ipv6(void)
if (table != NULL)
return -4;
- lpm_params.number_tbl8s = 1 << 21;
+ lpm_params.number_tbl8s = 1 << 18;
lpm_params.entry_unique_size = 0;
table = rte_table_lpm_ipv6_ops.f_create(&lpm_params, 0, entry_size);
if (table != NULL)