Centos-kernel-stream-9/lib/kunit/assert.c

273 lines
8.1 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/*
* Assertion and expectation serialization API.
*
* Copyright (C) 2019, Google LLC.
* Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
*/
#include <kunit/assert.h>
#include <kunit/test.h>
#include "string-stream.h"
kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const commit 21957f90b28f6bc118c055e3e564d45f6e4df45d Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Thu Jan 13 08:59:30 2022 -0800 kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const This is per Linus's suggestion in [1]. The issue there is that every KUNIT_EXPECT/KUNIT_ASSERT puts a kunit_assert object onto the stack. Normally we rely on compilers to elide this, but when that doesn't work out, this blows up the stack usage of kunit test functions. We can move some data off the stack by making it static. This change introduces a new `struct kunit_loc` to hold the file and line number and then just passing assert_type (EXPECT or ASSERT) as an argument. In [1], it was suggested to also move out the format string as well, but users could theoretically craft a format string at runtime, so we can't. This change leaves a copy of `assert_type` in kunit_assert for now because cleaning up all the macros to not pass it around is a bit more involved. Here's an example of the expanded code for KUNIT_FAIL(): if (__builtin_expect(!!(!(false)), 0)) { static const struct kunit_loc loc = { .file = ... }; struct kunit_fail_assert __assertion = { .assert = { .type ... }; kunit_do_failed_assertion(test, &loc, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, &__assertion.assert, ...); }; [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:33 +00:00
void kunit_assert_prologue(const struct kunit_loc *loc,
enum kunit_assert_type type,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
const char *expect_or_assert = NULL;
kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const commit 21957f90b28f6bc118c055e3e564d45f6e4df45d Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Thu Jan 13 08:59:30 2022 -0800 kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const This is per Linus's suggestion in [1]. The issue there is that every KUNIT_EXPECT/KUNIT_ASSERT puts a kunit_assert object onto the stack. Normally we rely on compilers to elide this, but when that doesn't work out, this blows up the stack usage of kunit test functions. We can move some data off the stack by making it static. This change introduces a new `struct kunit_loc` to hold the file and line number and then just passing assert_type (EXPECT or ASSERT) as an argument. In [1], it was suggested to also move out the format string as well, but users could theoretically craft a format string at runtime, so we can't. This change leaves a copy of `assert_type` in kunit_assert for now because cleaning up all the macros to not pass it around is a bit more involved. Here's an example of the expanded code for KUNIT_FAIL(): if (__builtin_expect(!!(!(false)), 0)) { static const struct kunit_loc loc = { .file = ... }; struct kunit_fail_assert __assertion = { .assert = { .type ... }; kunit_do_failed_assertion(test, &loc, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, &__assertion.assert, ...); }; [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:33 +00:00
switch (type) {
case KUNIT_EXPECTATION:
expect_or_assert = "EXPECTATION";
break;
case KUNIT_ASSERTION:
expect_or_assert = "ASSERTION";
break;
}
string_stream_add(stream, "%s FAILED at %s:%d\n",
kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const commit 21957f90b28f6bc118c055e3e564d45f6e4df45d Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Thu Jan 13 08:59:30 2022 -0800 kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const This is per Linus's suggestion in [1]. The issue there is that every KUNIT_EXPECT/KUNIT_ASSERT puts a kunit_assert object onto the stack. Normally we rely on compilers to elide this, but when that doesn't work out, this blows up the stack usage of kunit test functions. We can move some data off the stack by making it static. This change introduces a new `struct kunit_loc` to hold the file and line number and then just passing assert_type (EXPECT or ASSERT) as an argument. In [1], it was suggested to also move out the format string as well, but users could theoretically craft a format string at runtime, so we can't. This change leaves a copy of `assert_type` in kunit_assert for now because cleaning up all the macros to not pass it around is a bit more involved. Here's an example of the expanded code for KUNIT_FAIL(): if (__builtin_expect(!!(!(false)), 0)) { static const struct kunit_loc loc = { .file = ... }; struct kunit_fail_assert __assertion = { .assert = { .type ... }; kunit_do_failed_assertion(test, &loc, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, &__assertion.assert, ...); }; [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:33 +00:00
expect_or_assert, loc->file, loc->line);
}
kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const commit 21957f90b28f6bc118c055e3e564d45f6e4df45d Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Thu Jan 13 08:59:30 2022 -0800 kunit: split out part of kunit_assert into a static const This is per Linus's suggestion in [1]. The issue there is that every KUNIT_EXPECT/KUNIT_ASSERT puts a kunit_assert object onto the stack. Normally we rely on compilers to elide this, but when that doesn't work out, this blows up the stack usage of kunit test functions. We can move some data off the stack by making it static. This change introduces a new `struct kunit_loc` to hold the file and line number and then just passing assert_type (EXPECT or ASSERT) as an argument. In [1], it was suggested to also move out the format string as well, but users could theoretically craft a format string at runtime, so we can't. This change leaves a copy of `assert_type` in kunit_assert for now because cleaning up all the macros to not pass it around is a bit more involved. Here's an example of the expanded code for KUNIT_FAIL(): if (__builtin_expect(!!(!(false)), 0)) { static const struct kunit_loc loc = { .file = ... }; struct kunit_fail_assert __assertion = { .assert = { .type ... }; kunit_do_failed_assertion(test, &loc, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, &__assertion.assert, ...); }; [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:33 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_assert_prologue);
static void kunit_assert_print_msg(const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
if (message->fmt)
string_stream_add(stream, "\n%pV", message);
}
void kunit_fail_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
string_stream_add(stream, "%pV", message);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_fail_assert_format);
void kunit_unary_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_unary_assert *unary_assert;
unary_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_unary_assert, assert);
if (unary_assert->expected_true)
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s to be true, but is false\n",
unary_assert->condition);
else
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s to be false, but is true\n",
unary_assert->condition);
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_unary_assert_format);
void kunit_ptr_not_err_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_ptr_not_err_assert *ptr_assert;
ptr_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_ptr_not_err_assert,
assert);
if (!ptr_assert->value) {
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s is not null, but is\n",
ptr_assert->text);
} else if (IS_ERR(ptr_assert->value)) {
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s is not error, but is: %ld\n",
ptr_assert->text,
PTR_ERR(ptr_assert->value));
}
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_ptr_not_err_assert_format);
/* Checks if `text` is a literal representing `value`, e.g. "5" and 5 */
static bool is_literal(const char *text, long long value)
{
char *buffer;
int len;
bool ret;
len = snprintf(NULL, 0, "%lld", value);
if (strlen(text) != len)
return false;
buffer = kmalloc(len+1, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!buffer)
return false;
snprintf(buffer, len+1, "%lld", value);
ret = strncmp(buffer, text, len) == 0;
kfree(buffer);
return ret;
}
void kunit_binary_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_binary_assert *binary_assert;
binary_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_binary_assert,
assert);
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s %s %s, but\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
binary_assert->text->operation,
binary_assert->text->right_text);
if (!is_literal(binary_assert->text->left_text, binary_assert->left_value))
kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex commit 7b1dd2cf06e1da9a0982937e82736daa6cd400ee Author: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Date: Wed Oct 5 18:51:49 2022 +0100 kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex When KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() or KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ() log a failure, they log the two values being compared, with numerical values logged in decimal. In some cases, decimal output is painful to consume, and hexadecimal output would be more helpful. For example, this is the case for tests I'm currently developing for the arm64 insn encoding/decoding code, where comparing two 32-bit instruction opcodes results in output such as: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 | gen_insn == 1258422304 To make this easier to consume, this patch logs the values in both decimal and hexadecimal: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 (0x8b020020) | gen_insn == 1258422304 (0x4b020020) As can be seen from the example, having hexadecimal makes it significantly easier for a human to spot which specific bits are incorrect. Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: kunit-dev@googlegroups.com Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-5618 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-10-16 22:57:01 +00:00
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %lld (0x%llx)\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex commit 7b1dd2cf06e1da9a0982937e82736daa6cd400ee Author: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Date: Wed Oct 5 18:51:49 2022 +0100 kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex When KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() or KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ() log a failure, they log the two values being compared, with numerical values logged in decimal. In some cases, decimal output is painful to consume, and hexadecimal output would be more helpful. For example, this is the case for tests I'm currently developing for the arm64 insn encoding/decoding code, where comparing two 32-bit instruction opcodes results in output such as: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 | gen_insn == 1258422304 To make this easier to consume, this patch logs the values in both decimal and hexadecimal: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 (0x8b020020) | gen_insn == 1258422304 (0x4b020020) As can be seen from the example, having hexadecimal makes it significantly easier for a human to spot which specific bits are incorrect. Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: kunit-dev@googlegroups.com Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-5618 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-10-16 22:57:01 +00:00
binary_assert->left_value,
binary_assert->left_value);
if (!is_literal(binary_assert->text->right_text, binary_assert->right_value))
kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex commit 7b1dd2cf06e1da9a0982937e82736daa6cd400ee Author: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Date: Wed Oct 5 18:51:49 2022 +0100 kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex When KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() or KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ() log a failure, they log the two values being compared, with numerical values logged in decimal. In some cases, decimal output is painful to consume, and hexadecimal output would be more helpful. For example, this is the case for tests I'm currently developing for the arm64 insn encoding/decoding code, where comparing two 32-bit instruction opcodes results in output such as: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 | gen_insn == 1258422304 To make this easier to consume, this patch logs the values in both decimal and hexadecimal: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 (0x8b020020) | gen_insn == 1258422304 (0x4b020020) As can be seen from the example, having hexadecimal makes it significantly easier for a human to spot which specific bits are incorrect. Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: kunit-dev@googlegroups.com Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-5618 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-10-16 22:57:01 +00:00
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %lld (0x%llx)",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->right_text,
kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex commit 7b1dd2cf06e1da9a0982937e82736daa6cd400ee Author: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Date: Wed Oct 5 18:51:49 2022 +0100 kunit: log numbers in decimal and hex When KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() or KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ() log a failure, they log the two values being compared, with numerical values logged in decimal. In some cases, decimal output is painful to consume, and hexadecimal output would be more helpful. For example, this is the case for tests I'm currently developing for the arm64 insn encoding/decoding code, where comparing two 32-bit instruction opcodes results in output such as: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 | gen_insn == 1258422304 To make this easier to consume, this patch logs the values in both decimal and hexadecimal: | # test_insn_add_shifted_reg: EXPECTATION FAILED at arch/arm64/lib/test_insn.c:2791 | Expected obj_insn == gen_insn, but | obj_insn == 2332164128 (0x8b020020) | gen_insn == 1258422304 (0x4b020020) As can be seen from the example, having hexadecimal makes it significantly easier for a human to spot which specific bits are incorrect. Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: kunit-dev@googlegroups.com Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-5618 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-10-16 22:57:01 +00:00
binary_assert->right_value,
binary_assert->right_value);
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_binary_assert_format);
void kunit_binary_ptr_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_binary_ptr_assert *binary_assert;
binary_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_binary_ptr_assert,
assert);
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s %s %s, but\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
binary_assert->text->operation,
binary_assert->text->right_text);
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %px\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
binary_assert->left_value);
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %px",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->right_text,
binary_assert->right_value);
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_binary_ptr_assert_format);
/* Checks if KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() args were string literals.
* Note: `text` will have ""s where as `value` will not.
*/
static bool is_str_literal(const char *text, const char *value)
{
int len;
len = strlen(text);
if (len < 2)
return false;
if (text[0] != '\"' || text[len - 1] != '\"')
return false;
return strncmp(text + 1, value, len - 2) == 0;
}
void kunit_binary_str_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_binary_str_assert *binary_assert;
binary_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_binary_str_assert,
assert);
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s %s %s, but\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
binary_assert->text->operation,
binary_assert->text->right_text);
if (!is_str_literal(binary_assert->text->left_text, binary_assert->left_value))
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == \"%s\"\n",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->left_text,
binary_assert->left_value);
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
if (!is_str_literal(binary_assert->text->right_text, binary_assert->right_value))
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == \"%s\"",
kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs commit 2b6861e2372bac68861c54372f68f6016a7484fc Author: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Date: Tue Jan 25 13:00:11 2022 -0800 kunit: factor out str constants from binary assertion structs If the compiler doesn't optimize them away, each kunit assertion (use of KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ, etc.) can use 88 bytes of stack space in the worst and most common case. This has led to compiler warnings and a suggestion from Linus to move data from the structs into static const's where possible [1]. This builds upon [2] which did so for the base struct kunit_assert type. That only reduced sizeof(struct kunit_binary_assert) from 88 to 64. Given these are by far the most commonly used asserts, this patch factors out the textual representations of the operands and comparator into another static const, saving 16 more bytes. In detail, KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 2 + 2, 5) yields the following struct (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .left_value = 4, .right_text = "5", .right_value = 5, } After this change static const struct kunit_binary_assert_text __text = { .operation = "==", .left_text = "2 + 2", .right_text = "5", }; (struct kunit_binary_assert) { .assert = <struct kunit_assert>, .text = &__text, .left_value = 4, .right_value = 5, } This also DRYs the code a bit more since these str fields were repeated for the string and pointer versions of kunit_binary_assert. Note: we could name the kunit_binary_assert_text fields left/right instead of left_text/right_text. But that would require changing the macros a bit since they have args called "left" and "right" which would be substituted in `.left = #left` as `.2 + 2 = \"2 + 2\"`. [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220113165931.451305-6-dlatypov@google.com/ Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2168378 Signed-off-by: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
2023-02-22 20:05:32 +00:00
binary_assert->text->right_text,
binary_assert->right_value);
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-01-06 22:28:20 +00:00
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_binary_str_assert_format);
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
/* Adds a hexdump of a buffer to a string_stream comparing it with
* a second buffer. The different bytes are marked with <>.
*/
static void kunit_assert_hexdump(struct string_stream *stream,
const void *buf,
const void *compared_buf,
const size_t len)
{
size_t i;
const u8 *buf1 = buf;
const u8 *buf2 = compared_buf;
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT);
for (i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
if (!(i % 16) && i)
string_stream_add(stream, "\n" KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT);
if (buf1[i] != buf2[i])
string_stream_add(stream, "<%02x>", buf1[i]);
else
string_stream_add(stream, " %02x ", buf1[i]);
}
}
void kunit_mem_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
const struct va_format *message,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
struct kunit_mem_assert *mem_assert;
mem_assert = container_of(assert, struct kunit_mem_assert,
assert);
if (!mem_assert->left_value) {
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s is not null, but is\n",
mem_assert->text->left_text);
} else if (!mem_assert->right_value) {
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s is not null, but is\n",
mem_assert->text->right_text);
} else {
string_stream_add(stream,
KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "Expected %s %s %s, but\n",
mem_assert->text->left_text,
mem_assert->text->operation,
mem_assert->text->right_text);
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s ==\n",
mem_assert->text->left_text);
kunit_assert_hexdump(stream, mem_assert->left_value,
mem_assert->right_value, mem_assert->size);
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
string_stream_add(stream, "\n");
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s ==\n",
mem_assert->text->right_text);
kunit_assert_hexdump(stream, mem_assert->right_value,
mem_assert->left_value, mem_assert->size);
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
kunit_assert_print_msg(message, stream);
}
kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2160457 Upstream Status: v6.2-rc1 commit b8a926bea8b1e790b0afe21359c086e3ee08aee5 Author: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> AuthorDate: Tue Oct 25 20:10:41 2022 -0300 Commit: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> CommitDate: Thu Oct 27 02:39:47 2022 -0600 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, when 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 specified 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. That said, the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0); would translate to the expectation KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, foo, bar, size); Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net> Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> Reviewed-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@redhat.com>
2023-05-03 06:36:03 +00:00
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_mem_assert_format);