[v1] Support smp.clusters for x86

[PATCH RESEND 12/18] tests: Add test case of APIC ID for module level parsing

Posted by Zhao Liu 2 years, 12 months ago

From: Zhuocheng Ding <zhuocheng.ding@intel.com>

After i386 supports module level, it's time to add the test for module
level's parsing.

Signed-off-by: Zhuocheng Ding <zhuocheng.ding@intel.com>
Co-developed-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
---
 tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c b/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
index f21b8a5d95c2..55b731ccae55 100644
--- a/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
+++ b/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
     topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 1, 1};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_smt_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
 
     topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 1, 1};
@@ -74,13 +75,22 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
     topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 33, 2};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_width(&topo_info), ==, 6);
 
-    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 30, 2};
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 6, 30, 2};
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 7, 30, 2};
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 8, 30, 2};
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 9, 30, 2};
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 4);
+
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 6, 30, 2};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
-    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {2, 1, 30, 2};
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {2, 6, 30, 2};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 1);
-    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {3, 1, 30, 2};
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {3, 6, 30, 2};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
-    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {4, 1, 30, 2};
+    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {4, 6, 30, 2};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
 
     /* build a weird topology and see if IDs are calculated correctly
@@ -91,6 +101,7 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
     topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 6, 3};
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_smt_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_offset(&topo_info), ==, 2);
+    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
     g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_pkg_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
 
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH RESEND 12/18] tests: Add test case of APIC ID for module level parsing

Posted by wangyanan (Y) via 2 years, 11 months ago

在 2023/2/13 17:36, Zhao Liu 写道:
> From: Zhuocheng Ding <zhuocheng.ding@intel.com>
>
> After i386 supports module level, it's time to add the test for module
> level's parsing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhuocheng Ding <zhuocheng.ding@intel.com>
> Co-developed-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
> ---
>   tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c b/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
> index f21b8a5d95c2..55b731ccae55 100644
> --- a/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
> +++ b/tests/unit/test-x86-apicid.c
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
>       topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 1, 1};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_smt_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
>   
>       topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 1, 1};
> @@ -74,13 +75,22 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
>       topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 33, 2};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_width(&topo_info), ==, 6);
>   
> -    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 30, 2};
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 6, 30, 2};
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 7, 30, 2};
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 8, 30, 2};
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 3);
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 9, 30, 2};
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_width(&topo_info), ==, 4);
> +
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 6, 30, 2};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 0);
> -    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {2, 1, 30, 2};
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {2, 6, 30, 2};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 1);
> -    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {3, 1, 30, 2};
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {3, 6, 30, 2};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
> -    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {4, 1, 30, 2};
> +    topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {4, 6, 30, 2};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
>   
>       /* build a weird topology and see if IDs are calculated correctly
> @@ -91,6 +101,7 @@ static void test_topo_bits(void)
>       topo_info = (X86CPUTopoInfo) {1, 1, 6, 3};
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_smt_width(&topo_info), ==, 2);
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_core_offset(&topo_info), ==, 2);
> +    g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_module_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_die_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
>       g_assert_cmpuint(apicid_pkg_offset(&topo_info), ==, 5);
>   
Reviewed-by: Yanan Wang <wangyanan55@huawei.com>

Thanks,
Yanan