Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] test/lpm: return error on failure in rcu qsbr perf

[Dharmik Thakkar]

> On Nov 2, 2020, at 7:28 PM, Honnappa Nagarahalli 
> <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> 
>> Return error if Add/Delete fail in multiwriter perf test
>> 
>> Fixes: eff30b59cc2e ("test/lpm: add RCU performance tests")
>> Cc: honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com
>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thak...@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
>> ---
>> app/test/test_lpm_perf.c | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c index
>> 45164b23214b..55084816ab91 100644
>> --- a/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>> +++ b/app/test/test_lpm_perf.c
>> @@ -453,6 +453,8 @@ test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer(void *arg)
>>                                      next_hop_add) != 0) {
>>                              printf("Failed to add iteration %d, route#
>> %d\n",
>>                                      i, j);
>> +                            pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>> +                            return -1;
> Would be good to use the "goto error" method used in this file in other 
> functions.

Yes, will update in the next version.

> 
>>                      }
>>                      pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>              }
>> @@ -464,6 +466,8 @@ test_lpm_rcu_qsbr_writer(void *arg)
>>                              large_ldepth_route_table[j].depth) != 0) {
>>                              printf("Failed to delete iteration %d, route#
>> %d\n",
>>                                      i, j);
>> +                            pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>> +                            return -1;
>>                      }
>>                      pthread_mutex_unlock(&lpm_mutex);
>>              }
>> --
>> 2.17.1