<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div>Sorry, I left the meeting early.</div><div><br></div><div>It was earlier :</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> SET_PRIORITY( T2,P(2), T2, T0, T1),</blockquote><div><br></div><div>but now after checking thoroughly, I can confirm that it ought to be (because of the way affinities are set and checked while running the get_lowest_scheduled logic) :</div><div> SET_PRIORITY( T2,P(2), T2, T1, T0),<br></div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for pointing that out, this could have been a mistake.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">. It looks to be suspending every task, resuming 1<br>task on every CPU, and then suspending that task (assuming there is<br>only 1 runnable non-idle task on each CPU, and therefore executing == heir</blockquote><div>I am getting the data_exception the second time (last action) reset is called. It does not set the affinity of task that does not have index >CPU_COUNT and tries to resume the higher priority task. Maybe the reset function is making some assumptions. Nevertheless, I'll step through in each function and find out what's wrong.</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you</div><div> </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 10:08 PM Gedare Bloom <<a href="mailto:gedare@rtems.org" target="_blank">gedare@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi Richi,<br>
<br>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 9:52 AM Richi Dubey <<a href="mailto:richidubey@gmail.com" target="_blank">richidubey@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> I would request someone to please verify if this patch looks correct since I am testing my code on this test. The logic is taken from the paper and I was wondering if the reset function is handled correctly in this test because I still have a little hard time understanding how (and why) we are reordering the idle threads. Please let me know if there's anything that looks astray.<br>
><br>
<br>
The test logic makes sense to me. The only question I have is whether<br>
SET_PRIORITY( T2,P(2), T2, T1, T0),<br>
could also be<br>
SET_PRIORITY( T2,P(2), T2, T0, T1),<br>
<br>
I don't know these tests well enough to say for sure about what<br>
reset() is doing. It looks to be suspending every task, resuming 1<br>
task on every CPU, and then suspending that task (assuming there is<br>
only 1 runnable non-idle task on each CPU, and therefore executing ==<br>
heir).<br>
<br>
> Also, the same test can be accessed from this link: <a href="https://github.com/richidubey/rtems/blob/Strong-APA-v1.3/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/richidubey/rtems/blob/Strong-APA-v1.3/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c</a><br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> Richi.<br>
><br>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 9:18 PM Richi Dubey <<a href="mailto:richidubey@gmail.com" target="_blank">richidubey@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> ---<br>
>> testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c | 85 +++++++++++++----------<br>
>> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)<br>
>><br>
>> diff --git a/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c b/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c<br>
>> index bf8bc05231..89cc6404b9 100644<br>
>> --- a/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c<br>
>> +++ b/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c<br>
>> @@ -1,38 +1,40 @@<br>
>> /*<br>
>> - * Copyright (c) 2016, 2017 embedded brains GmbH. All rights reserved.<br>
>> + * Copyright (c) 2020 Richi Dubey<br>
>> + * All rights reserved.<br>
>> *<br>
>> - * embedded brains GmbH<br>
>> - * Dornierstr. 4<br>
>> - * 82178 Puchheim<br>
>> - * Germany<br>
>> - * <<a href="mailto:rtems@embedded-brains.de" target="_blank">rtems@embedded-brains.de</a>><br>
>> + * <a href="mailto:richidubey@gmail.com" target="_blank">richidubey@gmail.com</a><br>
>> *<br>
>> * The license and distribution terms for this file may be<br>
>> * found in the file LICENSE in this distribution or at<br>
>> * <a href="http://www.rtems.org/license/LICENSE" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.rtems.org/license/LICENSE</a>.<br>
>> */<br>
>> -<br>
>> #ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H<br>
>> #include "config.h"<br>
>> #endif<br>
>><br>
>> -#include "tmacros.h"<br>
>> +#include <tmacros.h><br>
>><br>
>> #include <rtems.h><br>
>><br>
>> const char rtems_test_name[] = "SMPSTRONGAPA 1";<br>
>><br>
>> -#define CPU_COUNT 4<br>
>> +#define CPU_COUNT 3<br>
>><br>
>> -#define TASK_COUNT (3 * CPU_COUNT)<br>
>> +#define TASK_COUNT 4<br>
>><br>
>> #define P(i) (UINT32_C(2) + i)<br>
>><br>
>> #define ALL ((UINT32_C(1) << CPU_COUNT) - 1)<br>
>><br>
>> -#define IDLE UINT8_C(255)<br>
>> +#define A(cpu0, cpu1, cpu2) ((cpu2 << 2) | (cpu1 << 1) | cpu0)<br>
>><br>
>> -#define NAME rtems_build_name('S', 'A', 'P', 'A')<br>
>> +typedef enum {<br>
>> + T0,<br>
>> + T1,<br>
>> + T2,<br>
>> + T3,<br>
>> + IDLE<br>
>> +} task_index;<br>
>><br>
>> typedef struct {<br>
>> enum {<br>
>> @@ -43,7 +45,7 @@ typedef struct {<br>
>> KIND_UNBLOCK<br>
>> } kind;<br>
>><br>
>> - size_t index;<br>
>> + task_index index;<br>
>><br>
>> struct {<br>
>> rtems_task_priority priority;<br>
>> @@ -65,54 +67,62 @@ typedef struct {<br>
>> KIND_RESET, \<br>
>> 0, \<br>
>> { 0 }, \<br>
>> - { IDLE, IDLE, IDLE, IDLE } \<br>
>> + { IDLE, IDLE, IDLE} \<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> -#define SET_PRIORITY(index, prio, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3) \<br>
>> +#define SET_PRIORITY(index, prio, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2) \<br>
>> { \<br>
>> KIND_SET_PRIORITY, \<br>
>> index, \<br>
>> { .priority = prio }, \<br>
>> - { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3 } \<br>
>> + { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2 } \<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> -#define SET_AFFINITY(index, aff, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3) \<br>
>> +#define SET_AFFINITY(index, aff, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2) \<br>
>> { \<br>
>> KIND_SET_AFFINITY, \<br>
>> index, \<br>
>> { .cpu_set = aff }, \<br>
>> - { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3 } \<br>
>> + { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2 } \<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> -#define BLOCK(index, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3) \<br>
>> +#define BLOCK(index, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2) \<br>
>> { \<br>
>> KIND_BLOCK, \<br>
>> index, \<br>
>> { 0 }, \<br>
>> - { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3 } \<br>
>> + { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2 } \<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> -#define UNBLOCK(index, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3) \<br>
>> +#define UNBLOCK(index, cpu0, cpu1, cpu2) \<br>
>> { \<br>
>> KIND_UNBLOCK, \<br>
>> index, \<br>
>> { 0 }, \<br>
>> - { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2, cpu3 } \<br>
>> + { cpu0, cpu1, cpu2 } \<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> static const test_action test_actions[] = {<br>
>> RESET,<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 0, 0, IDLE, IDLE, IDLE),<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 1, 0, 1, IDLE, IDLE),<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 2, 0, 1, 2, IDLE),<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 3, 0, 1, 2, 3),<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 5, 0, 1, 2, 3),<br>
>> - SET_PRIORITY( 3, P(4), 0, 1, 2, 3),<br>
>> - SET_PRIORITY( 5, P(3), 0, 1, 2, 5),<br>
>> - BLOCK( 5, 0, 1, 2, 3),<br>
>> - SET_AFFINITY( 5, ALL, 0, 1, 2, 3),<br>
>> - RESET,<br>
>> - UNBLOCK( 0, 0, IDLE, IDLE, IDLE),<br>
>> + UNBLOCK( T0, T0, IDLE, IDLE),<br>
>> + UNBLOCK( T1, T0, T1, IDLE),<br>
>> + UNBLOCK( T2, T0, T1, T2),<br>
>> + UNBLOCK( T3, T0, T1, T2),<br>
>> + SET_PRIORITY( T0, P(0), T0, T1, T2),<br>
>> + SET_PRIORITY( T1, P(1), T0, T1, T2),<br>
>> + SET_PRIORITY( T3, P(3), T0, T1, T2),<br>
>> + /*<br>
>> + * Introduce Task 2 intially with lowest priority to imitate late arrival<br>
>> + */<br>
>> + SET_PRIORITY( T2, P(4), T0, T1, T3),<br>
>> + SET_AFFINITY( T0, ALL, T0, T1, T3),<br>
>> + SET_AFFINITY( T1, A(0, 1, 1), T0, T1, T3),<br>
>> + SET_AFFINITY( T2, A(1, 0, 0), T0, T1, T3),<br>
>> + SET_AFFINITY( T3, A(0, 1, 1), T0, T1, T3),<br>
>> + /*<br>
>> + * Show that higher priority task gets dislodged from its processor<br>
>> + */<br>
>> + SET_PRIORITY( T2, P(2), T2, T1, T0),<br>
>> RESET<br>
>> };<br>
>><br>
>> @@ -182,7 +192,7 @@ static void check_cpu_allocations(test_context *ctx, const test_action *action)<br>
>> size_t i;<br>
>><br>
>> for (i = 0; i < CPU_COUNT; ++i) {<br>
>> - size_t e;<br>
>> + task_index e;<br>
>> const Per_CPU_Control *c;<br>
>> const Thread_Control *h;<br>
>><br>
>> @@ -279,7 +289,7 @@ static void test(void)<br>
>><br>
>> for (i = 0; i < TASK_COUNT; ++i) {<br>
>> sc = rtems_task_create(<br>
>> - NAME,<br>
>> + rtems_build_name(' ', ' ', 'T', '0' + i),<br>
>> P(i),<br>
>> RTEMS_MINIMUM_STACK_SIZE,<br>
>> RTEMS_DEFAULT_MODES,<br>
>> @@ -292,7 +302,10 @@ static void test(void)<br>
>> rtems_test_assert(sc == RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL);<br>
>> }<br>
>><br>
>> - sc = rtems_timer_create(NAME, &ctx->timer_id);<br>
>> + sc = rtems_timer_create(<br>
>> + rtems_build_name('A', 'C', 'T', 'N'),<br>
>> + &ctx->timer_id<br>
>> + );<br>
>> rtems_test_assert(sc == RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL);<br>
>><br>
>> sc = rtems_timer_fire_after(ctx->timer_id, 1, timer, ctx);<br>
>> --<br>
>> 2.17.1<br>
>><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> devel mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:devel@rtems.org" target="_blank">devel@rtems.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div>