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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1A5C33C8C for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 13:36:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A49C2051A for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 13:36:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="RxeJppXy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728080AbgAGNgJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 08:36:09 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f193.google.com ([209.85.210.193]:41071 "EHLO mail-pf1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728174AbgAGNff (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 08:35:35 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f193.google.com with SMTP id w62so28610035pfw.8 for ; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 05:35:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SE22RGLOYKiz1eXSXS7nfYqv4Wy/fOrGKZNHN2DjzL8=; b=RxeJppXyzqEudNTXxLvL/ymqLOJKtt2gWuCec3JaGwouR9QaWeZEskwDCIH+8qlRbS 4CAwKDVFG1d9/damMkNxQ01+n06IQBiMMUDMdZmHln6z+UC6E8oL3dICa7QNyWA3ILbz yG67ldNQKTKsEikztP/9BCbFksRlDPiw4WEopOrpxMXjNWY7mv6wV5uD4eS2ocwAs45g +I+ss9UBgaBJdK1xB7iBkDI3UtCqBORs/t2Ngmltz1TmdfRYCfL8Xh0mXNCG1WyX8pGn Bmqhsy/YqkoWJV4txFMYcTHFxS9X3VbWi772EOtc7AnLhPMzShKT6h7kuI3LcORdZbYE KTvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SE22RGLOYKiz1eXSXS7nfYqv4Wy/fOrGKZNHN2DjzL8=; b=X92M1kdCWj/8D1UgqJ9LTXartczM/nK9RTAIBXw5FmQ8vT82lAaRiFuxC1h2Xh/p0D oCK9Bz7t+HIxbTrNirGc+39SY28ARtVFb12P5eGQzZUk+ssk9smexzJiHS9Y8O60kgty EptYR7X3q4paFyLU9bjZpyVLVRInyoITMWIa9jV2jUJgVRDo3OT7ilCKVNzDd3M35a6s 7pCNctZAsOsDvCmwCuMziNqpLgZO9Ghw01wxKqV9zW3bhKCmz+kogQgbwN6oe6g2/Sru zp7ypJVpP5gdOmJQ6VBD1iKCg15Tzm+QpVliGJ7sltxlzmLYj3xPxoIQwGcN4D6i8a/q gBkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUO5NxyfR4nUq5jzALTkvJgVwiOLrGXUrYsfBFwiHOqt2KwD5R/ 8cWJPr2Ed+/mtyymTaJWGUnGzj4dv5cBuUNKsV01wpSOEMg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzEmJiP4Ezi3jo9KBQt5b917BVQ66ypaKo593gkrn4sefwV/e/2+Z3LG64tfJWo2hRtSFGGrfD1i/Gg/zIjFMk= X-Received: by 2002:a63:597:: with SMTP id 145mr112265397pgf.384.1578404134220; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 05:35:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <688d8f4b-266f-2c47-d4e9-d0336316a0a9@petrovitsch.priv.at> <20200107115220.25574-1-sjpark@amazon.com> In-Reply-To: <20200107115220.25574-1-sjpark@amazon.com> From: Brendan Higgins Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 05:35:21 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Re: What is the best way to compare an unsigned and a constant? To: SeongJae Park Cc: Bernd Petrovitsch , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , KUnit Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List , SeongJae Park Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Sorry for the delay, I was on vacation. (I still am, but I was too ;-).) On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:52 AM SeongJae Park wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 13:52:27 +0100 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > --------------D98A0A31D62B0BC2939BAEE9 > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > Hi all! > > > > On 27/12/2019 13:39, SeongJae Park wrote: > > [...] > > > I have a function returning 'unsigned long', and would like to write = a =3D > > kunit > > > test for the function, as below. > > >=3D20 > > > unsigned long foo(void) > > > { > > > return 42; > > > } > > >=3D20 > > > static void foo_test(struct kunit *test) > > > { > > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 42, foo()); > > > } > > > > For this case: shouldn't=3D20 > > ---- snip ---- > > static void foo_test(struct kunit *test) > > { > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 42ul, foo()); > > } > > ---- snip ---- > > do the trick? > > Unfortunately, it doesn't works. > > [13:04:58] Building KUnit Kernel ... > In file included from /.../linux/include/linux/list.h:9:0, > from /.../linux/include/linux/wait.h:7, > from /.../linux/include/linux/wait_bit.h:8, > from /.../linux/include/linux/fs.h:6, > from /.../linux/include/linux/debugfs.h:15, > from /.../linux/mm/damon.c:12: > /.../linux/mm/damon-test.h: In function =E2=80=98damon_test_foo=E2=80= =99: > /.../linux/include/linux/kernel.h:842:29: warning: comparison of dist= inct pointer types lacks a cast > (!!(sizeof((typeof(x) *)1 =3D=3D (typeof(y) *)1))) > ^ > /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:493:9: note: in expansion of macro = =E2=80=98__typecheck=E2=80=99 > ((void)__typecheck(__left, __right)); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~ > /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:517:2: note: in expansion of macro = =E2=80=98KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION=E2=80=99 > KUNIT_BASE_BINARY_ASSERTION(test, \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:606:2: note: in expansion of macro = =E2=80=98KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION=E2=80=99 > KUNIT_BASE_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION(test, \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:616:2: note: in expansion of macro = =E2=80=98KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION=E2=80=99 > KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION(test, \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > /.../linux/include/kunit/test.h:979:2: note: in expansion of macro = =E2=80=98KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION=E2=80=99 > KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION(test, KUNIT_EXPECTATION, left, right) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > /.../linux/mm/damon-test.h:565:2: note: in expansion of macro =E2=80= =98KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ=E2=80=99 > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 42ul, (int)foo()); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Isn't the issue here that you fixed the 42, but are now casting the result of foo() to an int? Or have you fixed that now too? Worst case (gross) scenario, you could just cast 42 to whatever type foo() returns. > Some other thoughts? > > > Thanks, > SeongJae Park > > > > > > MfG, > > Bernd > > --=3D20 > > "I dislike type abstraction if it has no real reason. And saving > > on typing is not a good reason - if your typing speed is the main > > issue when you're coding, you're doing something seriously wrong." > > - Linus Torvalds