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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 C97B0C54FCB for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:26:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA85216FD for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:26:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="aMpISK3E" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728497AbgDXS0Y (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 14:26:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52748 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726793AbgDXS0Y (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 14:26:24 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x144.google.com (mail-il1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::144]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F1D2C09B048 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x144.google.com with SMTP id b18so10185179ilf.2 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:26:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pYGcnKYRU9uURI0r1qD3tlSxc3V/4QuWnHzjogV6130=; b=aMpISK3EVPKuTv64GwuroTTPYBPsQ/4Pbu/lvzajy9aC8/wG7mQMIaFDJJsSJDLBhg nL0kPYtx97AksBGHO83KeT6qIWbpd4xkuh5lt0xyaxe4Dbso6X6QgeqnyWp3udLneel3 UaIe6kHxRIfd+1oYItIl/0j05NdFTCQOAcyyYEcFIhHsi2QIfx2lDEXaMM3/wwig/Jtu MQH1sEt95rnRP7vq5djLplB82O3Y2sbaArGPJWPxDO63K7xP13p5ODcSo3vUlYJrFoAK R0dDeUl345BBPNPrsuNzOOLu16SKyQcQQKVT04f1AdzEnzCjQgS5OxNGPuqAVx54si5E nqIA== 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; bh=pYGcnKYRU9uURI0r1qD3tlSxc3V/4QuWnHzjogV6130=; b=iWcQDiaahl4nyuCap4jwVdkZD3LtuYTlIQoU3Pn62vYlFe/iUGtiAM9bnVmg0tHUVp 4Ido9Uk3CkHpJfTIreriI0fdlsFY/ikVOK8fbD9d8BQ8w1IqsiqghTjABkx5gkm5zWGX m/NUCwUEQSnVOQ44BrjeyyOgn+NAV7meW+8ScZaRLkAusP/K6Or3WHB7qFO108LdYHZd RMeaObjxbj+YUSOTQmJJfkk2UczJSm6bqkAQSRDAuYHNmHOvudevDnpwI/j9tmj2Lr4A f6B+Ql0eFzDIdPixqRcwIGQaBIg6Rs5FBCWJYWY3kVpzdt8dW7AodU6jJGgPIO50icxQ Ji3w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYRdwqhSuBpOnyGgENb2e8OHHJs557LitOTMRIeb2imoRD1OXG6 W/D2OPy5UmF2HNOiG/KMy20qe+0hyBoXy35vGeM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJDNXAdjomHebtWL/SwtpY/wFcOOIsUAhljTeFxom3s098gX7QRiXQwkRBusMK/MOxvomK3nsgKocIGB9NDJZ8= X-Received: by 2002:a92:3a09:: with SMTP id h9mr6622973ila.5.1587752783415; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:26:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200424122619.GA5573@syed> In-Reply-To: From: Syed Nayyar Waris Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 23:56:11 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] lib/test_bitmap.c: Add for_each_set_clump test cases To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , William Breathitt Gray , Linus Walleij , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 3:29 PM Syed Nayyar Waris wrote: > > > > The introduction of the generic for_each_set_clump macro need test > > cases to verify the implementation. This patch adds test cases for > > scenarios in which clump sizes are 8 bits, 24 bits, 30 bits and 6 bits. > > The cases contain situations where clump is getting split at the word > > boundary and also when zeroes are present in the start and middle of > > bitmap. > > ... > > > #define expect_eq_clump8(...) __expect_eq(clump8, ##__VA_ARGS__) > > +#define expect_eq_clump(...) __expect_eq(clump, ##__VA_ARGS__) > > What the difference with clump8() ? Can either of them use another? > The difference is that generic (Non-8 version) expect_eq_clump(...) expands to __check_eq_clump(...), which further uses clump_size variable to check for the tests. Now this clump_size can have any value signifying number of bits (less than or equal to BITS_PER_LONG). While the clump8 version uses a fixed (hardcoded) value '8' for clump size. I don't think either of them can use another. > ... > > > #define CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS 64 > > > +static void __init test_for_each_set_clump_8(void) /* 8 bit clumps test using > > + new for_each_set_clump */ > > +{ > > > +#define CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS 64 > > Isn't it a redefinition? Shouldn't we undef all local definitions > above and below? > > Also, can we derive it's size based on ARRAY_SIZE() and clump size? Actually this macro is to create bitmap having a particular size. The size doesn't need to be related to or derived from clump_size necessarily. I believe I should hardcode it - as it is just a test value. I will submit this change in next version. Let me know if you think otherwise. > > > + DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS); > > + unsigned long start, clump, clump_size = 8; > > + > > + /* set bitmap to test case */ > > + bitmap_zero(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x38000201, 0, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x05ff0f38, 32, 32); > > + > > + for_each_set_clump(start, clump, bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS, clump_size) > > + expect_eq_clump(start, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS, clump_exp1, &clump, clump_size); > > +} > > + > > +static void __init test_for_each_set_clump_24(void) /* 24 bit clumps */ > > +{ > > +#define CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2 256 > > + DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + unsigned long start, clump, clump_size = 24; > > + unsigned long size = clump_size * 10; > > + > > + /* set bitmap to test case */ > > + bitmap_zero(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xeffedcba, 0, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xbbbbabcd, 32, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x000000aa, 64, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x000000aa, 96, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00ff0000, 128, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xaaaaaa00, 160, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xff000000, 192, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00aa0000, 224, 32); > > + > > + for_each_set_clump(start, clump, bits, size, clump_size) > > + expect_eq_clump(start, size, clump_exp2, &clump, clump_size); > > +} > > + > > +static void __init test_for_each_set_clump_30(void) /* 30 bit clumps */ > > +{ > > +#define CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2 256 > > + DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + unsigned long start, clump, clump_size = 30; > > + unsigned long size = clump_size * 8; > > + > > + /* set bitmap to test case */ > > + bitmap_zero(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000000, 0, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000000, 32, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000000, 64, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x0f000000, 96, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00ff0000, 128, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xaaaaaa00, 160, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xff000000, 192, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00aa0000, 224, 32); > > + > > + for_each_set_clump(start, clump, bits, size, clump_size) > > + expect_eq_clump(start, size, clump_exp3, &clump, clump_size); > > +} > > + > > +static void __init test_for_each_set_clump_6(void) /* 6 bit clumps */ > > +{ > > +#define CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2 256 > > + DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + unsigned long start, clump, clump_size = 6; > > + unsigned long size = clump_size * 3; > > + > > + /* set bitmap to test case */ > > + bitmap_zero(bits, CLUMP_EXP_NUMBITS_2); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000ac0, 0, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000000, 32, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00000000, 64, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x0f000000, 96, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00ff0000, 128, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xaaaaaa00, 160, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0xff000000, 192, 32); > > + bitmap_set_value(bits, 0x00aa0000, 224, 32); > > + > > + for_each_set_clump(start, clump, bits, size, clump_size) > > + expect_eq_clump(start, size, clump_exp4, &clump, clump_size); > > +} > > Can we unify all above and provide simple two test data sets: > expected, input, clump size and other information as function > parameter? Yes I can do that. I will try it out in next version (v2). > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko Thank You! Syed Nayyar Waris