Re: [PATCH 1/8] lib: test_bitmap: clearly separate ERANGE from EINVAL tests.

From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lizefan@huawei.com,
	mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, josh@joshtriplett.org,
	yury.norov@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org, paulmck@kernel.org,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] lib: test_bitmap: clearly separate ERANGE from EINVAL tests.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 02:21:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210127072139.GD23530@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YBCD+czt+6IjAymI@smile.fi.intel.com>

[Re: [PATCH 1/8] lib: test_bitmap: clearly separate ERANGE from EINVAL tests.] On 26/01/2021 (Tue 23:04) Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:11:34PM -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > This block of tests was meant to find/flag incorrect use of the ":"
> > and "/" separators (syntax errors) and invalid (zero) group len.
> > 
> > However they were specified with an 8 bit width and 32 bit operations,
> > so they really contained two errors (EINVAL and ERANGE).
> > 
> > Promote them to 32 bit so it is clear what they are meant to target,
> > and then add tests specific for ERANGE (no syntax errors, just doing
> > 32bit op on 8 bit width, plus a typical 9-on-8 fencepost error).
> > 
> > Note that the remaining "10-1" on 8 is left as-is, since that captures
> > the fact that we check for (r->start > r->end) ---> EINVAL before we
> > check for (r->end >= nbits) ---> ERANGE.  If the code is ever re-ordered
> > then this test will pick up the mismatched errno value.
> 
> I didn't get the last statement. You meant code in the bitmap library itself,
> and not in the test cases? Please, clarify this somehow.

It probably wasn't worth a mention at all, as that test in question was
left unchanged;  but yes - it was a reference to the ordering of the
sanity checks in the bitmap code itself and not the test order.   I'll
simply delete the confusing "10-1" paragraph/comment. 

> I don't really much care, since it's not a tricky commit, but it might be split
> to two or three separated ones. Anyway, feel free to add
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>

Since you mentioned it, I assume you would prefer it.  So I will make
the 8 --> 32 change in one commit, and add the two new ERANGE tests in
another subsequent commit.

Thanks,
Paul.
--

> 
> > Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
> > Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
> > ---
> >  lib/test_bitmap.c | 16 +++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/test_bitmap.c b/lib/test_bitmap.c
> > index 4425a1dd4ef1..3d2cd3b1de84 100644
> > --- a/lib/test_bitmap.c
> > +++ b/lib/test_bitmap.c
> > @@ -337,13 +337,15 @@ static const struct test_bitmap_parselist parselist_tests[] __initconst = {
> >  
> >  	{-EINVAL, "-1",	NULL, 8, 0},
> >  	{-EINVAL, "-0",	NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "10-1", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0/", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0/0", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:1/0", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -	{-EINVAL, "0-31:10/1", NULL, 8, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "10-1", NULL, 8, 0},	/* (start > end) ; also ERANGE */
> > +	{-ERANGE, "8-8", NULL, 8, 0},
> > +	{-ERANGE, "0-31", NULL, 8, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:", NULL, 32, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0", NULL, 32, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0/", NULL, 32, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:0/0", NULL, 32, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:1/0", NULL, 32, 0},
> > +	{-EINVAL, "0-31:10/1", NULL, 32, 0},
> >  	{-EOVERFLOW, "0-98765432123456789:10/1", NULL, 8, 0},
> >  
> >  	{-EINVAL, "a-31", NULL, 8, 0},
> > -- 
> > 2.17.1
> > 
> 
> -- 
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
> 
> 