Hi Nicolas, On 11/24/22 17:06, Nicolas Chautru wrote:
Missing implementation for offload test with FFT. Only build when the optional build flag RTE_BBDEV_OFFLOAD_COST is set.Fixes: 0acdb9866756 ("test/bbdev: add FFT operations cases") Signed-off-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chau...@intel.com> --- app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+) diff --git a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c index 1859952901..b2e536b5e3 100644 --- a/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c +++ b/app/test-bbdev/test_bbdev_perf.c @@ -4940,6 +4940,88 @@ get_bbdev_queue_stats(uint16_t dev_id, uint16_t queue_id, return 0; }+static int+offload_latency_test_fft(struct rte_mempool *mempool, struct test_buffers *bufs, + struct rte_bbdev_fft_op *ref_op, uint16_t dev_id, + uint16_t queue_id, const uint16_t num_to_process, + uint16_t burst_sz, struct test_time_stats *time_st) +{ + int i, dequeued, ret; + struct rte_bbdev_fft_op *ops_enq[MAX_BURST], *ops_deq[MAX_BURST]; + uint64_t enq_start_time, deq_start_time; + uint64_t enq_sw_last_time, deq_last_time; + struct rte_bbdev_stats stats; + + for (i = 0, dequeued = 0; dequeued < num_to_process; ++i) { + uint16_t enq = 0, deq = 0; + + if (unlikely(num_to_process - dequeued < burst_sz)) + burst_sz = num_to_process - dequeued; + + rte_bbdev_fft_op_alloc_bulk(mempool, ops_enq, burst_sz);
It might be safer to check for error. Given how late we are in the release, and also because it is in the test application, I'm fine if the fix is done in next release. Other than that, it looks good to me: Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com> Thanks, Maxime
