| Message ID | 20230227214524.914050-1-yury.norov@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] lib/test_bitmap: increment failure counter properly | expand |
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 01:45:23PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: > The tests that don't use expect_eq() macro to determine that a test is > failured must increment failed_tests explicitly. ... > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr32(nbits == %d:" > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", Usually we don't split string literals (since checkpatch doesn't complain on a looong lines with them at the end of the line), ... > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr64(nbits == %d:" > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", nbits, next_bit); Ditto. P.S. Seems a material for another patch.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:55:05AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 01:45:23PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: > > The tests that don't use expect_eq() macro to determine that a test is > > failured must increment failed_tests explicitly. > > ... > > > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr32(nbits == %d:" > > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", > > Usually we don't split string literals (since checkpatch doesn't complain on a > looong lines with them at the end of the line), > > ... > > > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr64(nbits == %d:" > > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", nbits, next_bit); > > Ditto. > > P.S. Seems a material for another patch. If you're OK with this patch, can you give your review tag please? Thanks, Yury
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 06:49:29PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:55:05AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 01:45:23PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: > > > The tests that don't use expect_eq() macro to determine that a test is > > > failured must increment failed_tests explicitly. > > > > ... > > > > > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr32(nbits == %d:" > > > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", > > > > Usually we don't split string literals (since checkpatch doesn't complain on a > > looong lines with them at the end of the line), > > > > ... > > > > > pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr64(nbits == %d:" > > > " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", nbits, next_bit); > > > > Ditto. > > > > P.S. Seems a material for another patch. > > If you're OK with this patch, can you give your review tag please? I'm fine with the series, Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
diff --git a/lib/test_bitmap.c b/lib/test_bitmap.c index 8954610ec683..c4b90d145398 100644 --- a/lib/test_bitmap.c +++ b/lib/test_bitmap.c @@ -471,6 +471,7 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_parselist(void) if (err != ptest.errno) { pr_err("parselist: %d: input is %s, errno is %d, expected %d\n", i, ptest.in, err, ptest.errno); + failed_tests++; continue; } @@ -479,6 +480,7 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_parselist(void) pr_err("parselist: %d: input is %s, result is 0x%lx, expected 0x%lx\n", i, ptest.in, bmap[0], *ptest.expected); + failed_tests++; continue; } @@ -512,11 +514,13 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_printlist(void) if (ret != slen + 1) { pr_err("bitmap_print_to_pagebuf: result is %d, expected %d\n", ret, slen); + failed_tests++; goto out; } if (strncmp(buf, expected, slen)) { pr_err("bitmap_print_to_pagebuf: result is %s, expected %s\n", buf, expected); + failed_tests++; goto out; } @@ -584,6 +588,7 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_parse(void) if (err != test.errno) { pr_err("parse: %d: input is %s, errno is %d, expected %d\n", i, test.in, err, test.errno); + failed_tests++; continue; } @@ -592,6 +597,7 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_parse(void) pr_err("parse: %d: input is %s, result is 0x%lx, expected 0x%lx\n", i, test.in, bmap[0], *test.expected); + failed_tests++; continue; } @@ -616,10 +622,12 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_arr32(void) next_bit = find_next_bit(bmap2, round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG), nbits); - if (next_bit < round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG)) + if (next_bit < round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG)) { pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr32(nbits == %d:" " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", nbits, next_bit); + failed_tests++; + } if (nbits < EXP1_IN_BITS - 32) expect_eq_uint(arr[DIV_ROUND_UP(nbits, 32)], @@ -642,15 +650,19 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_arr64(void) expect_eq_bitmap(bmap2, exp1, nbits); next_bit = find_next_bit(bmap2, round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG), nbits); - if (next_bit < round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG)) + if (next_bit < round_up(nbits, BITS_PER_LONG)) { pr_err("bitmap_copy_arr64(nbits == %d:" " tail is not safely cleared: %d\n", nbits, next_bit); + failed_tests++; + } if ((nbits % 64) && - (arr[(nbits - 1) / 64] & ~GENMASK_ULL((nbits - 1) % 64, 0))) + (arr[(nbits - 1) / 64] & ~GENMASK_ULL((nbits - 1) % 64, 0))) { pr_err("bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == %d): tail is not safely cleared: 0x%016llx (must be 0x%016llx)\n", nbits, arr[(nbits - 1) / 64], GENMASK_ULL((nbits - 1) % 64, 0)); + failed_tests++; + } if (nbits < EXP1_IN_BITS - 64) expect_eq_uint(arr[DIV_ROUND_UP(nbits, 64)], 0xa5a5a5a5);
The tests that don't use expect_eq() macro to determine that a test is failured must increment failed_tests explicitly. Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230225184702.GA3587246@roeck-us.net/ Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> --- lib/test_bitmap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)