From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 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 22B3AC433FE for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 19:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229592AbiJRTGJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2022 15:06:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:32772 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229525AbiJRTGI (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2022 15:06:08 -0400 Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DE906CF58; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 12:06:07 -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 mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4MsNcZ1GDtzDqcc; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 19:06:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1666119966; bh=Gr/xKNnEiMomlNgruYDgo3GOUImfZ+AE5a1D5Kk9Rfo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=AAJO2wMmA3juI1JivHSpYFauDk6cMOgbeovLbsLfc5UTzbwJAV0RXvJ47NIr8Mt3t UCzOFR/m96TjIZVhHFV3FLE/M0hmAYcZ3CrWiVkcSrtcXAjWe954xqIt5xsw7adSpW UZxq+n4J+5ykznIkJJGQjKSeZAhbHQVjBhWK7tHA= X-Riseup-User-ID: D105B71DF621A45D615ABA65EC5FE7460C7D9F81A97C8542198EC3DEAAB97F61 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews2.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4MsNcR49RTz20cj; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 19:05:59 +0000 (UTC) From: =?UTF-8?q?Ma=C3=ADra=20Canal?= To: Brendan Higgins , davidgow@google.com, Daniel Latypov , airlied@gmail.com, 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=C3=ADra=20Canal?= Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 16:05:38 -0300 Message-Id: <20221018190541.189780-1-mairacanal@riseup.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 v6 has some changes on the first patch, due to rebase on top of Linux 6.1, specially the renaming of KUNIT_ASSERTION macro to _KUNIT_FAILED (97d453bc4007d4ac148c2ba89904026612b91ec9). Moreover, the DRM KUnit tests were mainlined in 6.1. 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. 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(-) -- 2.37.3