linux-kselftest.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
To: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc: Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi@google.com>,
	brendanhiggins@google.com, rmoar@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Documentation: KUnit: reword description of assertions
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2022 15:45:36 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABVgOSkJGoyMrv-=Zd+8sveH0+04G4twmae+p+TJWdpB6SJ+FQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGS_qxqPUHWyJ4nNQRdm79sMwHwysHV=99WXzMsY=g_WzSjZaw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2944 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 12:04 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 9:07 PM Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 6:06 AM 'Daniel Latypov' via KUnit Development
> > <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The existing wording implies that kunit_kmalloc_array() is "the method
> > > under test". We're actually testing the sort() function in that example.
> > > This is because the example was changed in commit 953574390634
> > > ("Documentation: KUnit: Rework writing page to focus on writing tests"),
> > > but the wording was not.
> > >
> > > Also add a `note` telling people they can use the KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ()
> > > macros from any function. Some users might be coming from a framework
> > > like gUnit where that'll compile but silently do the wrong thing.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > Thank you, Daniel. This looks fine to me except for a small typo in
> > this line "to abort
> > the test if we there's an allocation error". Also, I have reworded
> > that paragraph a bit
> > as below. Please feel free to ignore, if you do not agree:
> >
> > In this example, to test the ``sort()`` function, we must be able to
> > allocate an array.
> > If there is an allocation error, the test is terminated using the function
> > ``KUNIT ASSERT NOT ERR OR NULL()``.
>
> Thanks for catching that.
>
> Hmm, I slightly prefer the current structure since I like having the
> <thing> being described near the start of the sentence as opposed to
> the very end.
> I'll wait a bit before sending a v3 to give time for anyone else to
> chime in, if they want.
>
> Snipping the email to the block in question:
>
> > > +In this example, we need to be able to allocate an array to test the ``sort()``
> > > +function. So we use ``KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL()`` to abort the test if
> > > +we there's an allocation error.

+1 for the patch from me (modulo the "we" typo Sadiya mentioned).

I otherwise also prefer Daniel's original here (though I'd possibly
merge it into one sentence, personally).
Maybe:
"In this example, as we need to be able to allocate an array in order
to test the sort function, we use ``KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL()``
to abort the test if there's an allocation error."
or
"In this example, we need to allocate an array to test the sort
function. We therefore use ``KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL()``, which
will automatically abort the test if there's an allocation error."

But any of the above wordings are fine for me.

The note about ASSERT() working in any function is useful, though
there are definitely some "gotcha"s caused by killing the kthread
we'll need to resolve. (If there are any dangling references to things
on the stack, for example.) Still, not an issue for this bit of
documentation.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

(Once the "we" typo is fixed.)

Cheers,
-- David

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4003 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-15  7:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-09  0:36 [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation: KUnit: make usage.rst a superset of tips.rst, remove duplication Daniel Latypov
2022-11-09  0:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] Documentation: KUnit: reword description of assertions Daniel Latypov
2022-11-10  5:07   ` Sadiya Kazi
2022-11-10 16:04     ` Daniel Latypov
2022-11-15  7:45       ` David Gow [this message]
2022-11-15 18:07         ` Daniel Latypov
2022-11-09  0:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] Documentation: kunit: Remove redundant 'tips.rst' page Daniel Latypov
2022-11-11  5:58   ` Sadiya Kazi
2022-11-10  4:47 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation: KUnit: make usage.rst a superset of tips.rst, remove duplication Sadiya Kazi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CABVgOSkJGoyMrv-=Zd+8sveH0+04G4twmae+p+TJWdpB6SJ+FQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=davidgow@google.com \
    --cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
    --cc=dlatypov@google.com \
    --cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rmoar@google.com \
    --cc=sadiyakazi@google.com \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).