linux-kselftest.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* What is the best way to compare an unsigned and a constant?
@ 2019-12-27 12:39 SeongJae Park
  2019-12-27 12:52 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: SeongJae Park @ 2019-12-27 12:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: brendanhiggins; +Cc: linux-kselftest, kunit-dev, linux-kernel, SeongJae Park

Hello,


I have a function returning 'unsigned long', and would like to write a kunit
test for the function, as below.

    unsigned long foo(void)
    {
    	return 42;
    }

    static void foo_test(struct kunit *test)
    {
        KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 42, foo());
    }

However, this kunit gives me below warning for the above code:

    /.../linux/include/linux/kernel.h:842:29: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
       (!!(sizeof((typeof(x) *)1 == (typeof(y) *)1)))
                                 ^
    /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:493:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘__typecheck’
      ((void)__typecheck(__left, __right));           \
             ^~~~~~~~~~~
    /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:517:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION’
      KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION(test,           \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:606:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION’
      KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION(test,           \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:616:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION’
      KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION(test,           \
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:979:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION’
      KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION(test, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, left, right)
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    /.../linux/mm/foo-test.h:565:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ’
      KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 42, foo());
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I could remove the warning by explicitly type casting the constant as below:

        KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, (unsigned long)42, foo());

However, now 'checkpatch.pl' complains about the type casting as below.

    WARNING: Unnecessary typecast of c90 int constant
    #565: FILE: mm/foo-test.h:565:
    +       KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, (unsigned long)42, foo());

Of course, there could be several work-arounds for these warnings, such as
using 'EXPECT_TRUE(test, 42 == foo())' or casting the function's return value.
Nonetheless, I'm not sure what is the right way.  Could you please let me know
what is the recommended way for this case?


Thanks,
SeongJae Park

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2020-01-08 14:26 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-12-27 12:39 What is the best way to compare an unsigned and a constant? SeongJae Park
2019-12-27 12:52 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2019-12-27 13:08   ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-07 11:52   ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-07 13:35     ` Brendan Higgins
2020-01-07 13:49       ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-08 14:12         ` Brendan Higgins
2020-01-08 14:26           ` SeongJae Park

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).