| Message ID | 20221025231043.115295-1-mairacanal@riseup.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros | expand |
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 7:11 AM Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> wrote: > > Currently, in order to compare memory blocks in KUnit, the KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ or > KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE macros are used in conjunction with the memcmp function, > such as: > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); > > Although this usage produces correct results for the test cases, if the > expectation fails the error message is not very helpful, indicating only the > return of the memcmp function. > > Therefore, create a new set of macros KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and > KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ that compare memory blocks until a determined size. In > case of expectation failure, those macros print the hex dump of the memory > blocks, making it easier to debug test failures for memory blocks. > > The v7 has some formatting changes on the first patch and it was rebased on > top of the mainline (due to 7089003304c6). > > The first patch of the series introduces the KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and > KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ. The second patch adds an example of memory block > expectations on the kunit-example-test.c. And the last patch replaces the > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ for KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ on the existing occurrences. > > Best Regards, > - Maíra Canal > > v1 -> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/2a0dcd75-5461-5266-2749-808f638f4c50@riseup.net/T/#m402cc72eb01fb3b88d6706cf7d1705fdd51e5da2 > > - Change "determinated" to "specified" (Daniel Latypov). > - Change the macro KUNIT_EXPECT_ARREQ to KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ, in order to make > it easier for users to infer the right size unit (Daniel Latypov). > - Mark the different bytes on the failure message with a <> (Daniel Latypov). > - Replace a constant number of array elements for ARRAY_SIZE() (André Almeida). > - Rename "array" and "expected" variables to "array1" and "array2" (Daniel Latypov). > > v2 -> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220802212621.420840-1-mairacanal@riseup.net/T/#t > > - Make the bytes aligned at output. > - Add KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT to the output for the indentation (Daniel Latypov). > - Line up the trailing \ at macros using tabs (Daniel Latypov). > - Line up the params to the functions (Daniel Latypov). > - Change "Increament" to "Augment" (Daniel Latypov). > - Use sizeof() for array sizes (Daniel Latypov). > - Add Daniel Latypov's tags. > > v3 -> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/CABVgOSm_59Yr82deQm2C=18jjSv_akmn66zs4jxx3hfziXPeHg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t > > - Fix wrapped lines by the mail client (David Gow). > - Mention on documentation that KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ is not recommended for > structured data (David Gow). > - Add Muhammad Usama Anjum's tag. > > v4 -> v5: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220808125237.277126-1-mairacanal@riseup.net/ > > - Rebase on top of drm-misc-next. > - Add David Gow's tags. > > v5 -> v6: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220921014515.113062-1-mairacanal@riseup.net/ > > - Rebase on top of Linux 6.1. > - Change KUNIT_ASSERTION macro to _KUNIT_FAILED. > > v6 -> v7: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20221018190541.189780-1-mairacanal@riseup.net/ > > - Format nits (David Gow). > - Rebase on top of Linux 6.1-rc2. > > Maíra Canal (3): > kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros > kunit: Add KUnit memory block assertions to the example_all_expect_macros_test > kunit: Use KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ macro > > .../gpu/drm/tests/drm_format_helper_test.c | 12 +-- > include/kunit/assert.h | 33 +++++++ > include/kunit/test.h | 87 +++++++++++++++++++ > lib/kunit/assert.c | 56 ++++++++++++ > lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c | 7 ++ > net/core/dev_addr_lists_test.c | 4 +- > 6 files changed, 191 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > Thanks very much -- this works here, and be good to go into 6.2. Cheers, -- David