From patchwork Mon Aug 8 12:52:34 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: =?utf-8?q?Ma=C3=ADra_Canal?= X-Patchwork-Id: 12938759 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB09C00140 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242548AbiHHMxQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2022 08:53:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38012 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232541AbiHHMxP (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2022 08:53:15 -0400 Received: from mx0.riseup.net (mx0.riseup.net [198.252.153.6]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FDA9DED9; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 05:53:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fews2.riseup.net (fews2-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.riseup.net", Issuer "R3" (not verified)) by mx0.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4M1bj52cJNz9sms; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:53:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1659963193; bh=RfZoBFN+CF2k/0yh+pE6rsD15kCG3+WqYuHrrNZkt10=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=btNJY+qzCgLkrrezrVs/AfJtKG4m0McV0t45Ii3KNFYevNXOSwadldHV0LIF0ni0T PCvUQ3SH+XVg1qoxs+dTcYebgujczDsTRkcoec+gfPqeGKQdd8nsmJQTJwxqdZlJXU mbFbAmaCMnw83Rkh5e+WBOLbLmk9SjXppwogGn7Y= X-Riseup-User-ID: 05A55BEB41A0F880E39A7900482772FF636898CA6AAFF8327AEFBFD791A7E720 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews2.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4M1bhy4mWPz20cj; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:53:06 +0000 (UTC) From: =?utf-8?q?Ma=C3=ADra_Canal?= To: Brendan Higgins , davidgow@google.com, Daniel Latypov , airlied@linux.ie, daniel@ffwll.ch, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, jose.exposito89@gmail.com, javierm@redhat.com Cc: andrealmeid@riseup.net, melissa.srw@gmail.com, siqueirajordao@riseup.net, Isabella Basso , magalilemes00@gmail.com, tales.aparecida@gmail.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?q?Ma?= =?utf-8?q?=C3=ADra_Canal?= Subject: [PATCH v4 0/3] kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2022 09:52:34 -0300 Message-Id: <20220808125237.277126-1-mairacanal@riseup.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org 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 v4 doesn't bring many changes. The output is aligned just like the previous version but it fixes some mail client problems (sorry about that) and mentions that this macros are not recommended for structured data. 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. 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 | 6 +- include/kunit/assert.h | 34 ++++++++ include/kunit/test.h | 84 +++++++++++++++++++ lib/kunit/assert.c | 56 +++++++++++++ lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c | 7 ++ net/core/dev_addr_lists_test.c | 4 +- 6 files changed, 186 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: David Gow