[PATCH v2 2/5] lib: Add SBIUnit testing macros and functions

[Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 04:12:13PM +0000, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> On 2/28/24 14:19, Andrew Jones wrote:
> 
> > > + * Author: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
> > > + */
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SBIUNIT
> > > +#ifndef __SBI_UNIT_H__
> > > +#define __SBI_UNIT_H__
> > > +
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_types.h>
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_console.h>
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_string.h>
> > > +
> > > +struct sbiunit_test_case {
> > > +	const char *name;
> > > +	bool enabled;
> > > +	bool failed;
> > > +	void (*test_func)(struct sbiunit_test_case *test);
> > > +	void (*onerr)(struct sbiunit_test_case *test);
> > 
> > Please rename to on_error()
> > 
> 
> Hmm, it looks like this 'onerr' is not used anywhere, so I'll just get rid
> of it in the V3.
> 
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +struct sbiunit_test_suite {
> > > +	const char *name;
> > > +	struct sbiunit_test_case *cases;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(func)		\
> > > +	{				\
> > > +		.name = #func,		\
> > > +		.enabled = true,	\
> > > +		.failed = false,	\
> > > +		.test_func = (func)	\
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_TEST_SUITE(suite_name, cases_arr)		\
> > > +	struct sbiunit_test_suite suite_name = {		\
> > > +		.name = #suite_name,				\
> > > +		.cases = cases_arr				\
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +#define _sbiunit_msg(test, msg) "[SBIUnit] [%s:%d]: %s: %s", __FILE__,	\
> > > +				__LINE__, test->name, msg
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_INFO(test, msg) sbi_printf(_sbiunit_msg(test, msg))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_PANIC(test, msg) sbi_panic(_sbiunit_msg(test, msg))
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_EXPECT(test, cond) do {							\
> > > +	if (!(cond)) {									\
> > > +		test->failed = true;							\
> > > +		SBIUNIT_INFO(test, "Condition \"" #cond "\" expected to be true!\n");	\
> > > +	}										\
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, cond) do {						\
> > > +	if (!(cond)) {								\
> > > +		test->failed = true;						\
> > 
> > No need to set failed since the next line calls panic.
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I agree.
> 
> > > +		SBIUNIT_PANIC(test, "Condition \"" #cond "\" must be true!\n");	\
> > > +	}									\
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, a, b) SBIUNIT_EXPECT(test, (a) == (b))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, a, b) SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, (a) == (b))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_EXPECT_NE(test, a, b) SBIUNIT_EXPECT(test, (a) != (b))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT_NE(test, a, b) SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, (a) != (b))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, a, b, len) SBIUNIT_EXPECT(test, !sbi_memcmp(a, b, len))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT_MEMEQ(test, a, b, len) SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, !sbi_memcmp(a, b, len))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, a, b, len) SBIUNIT_EXPECT(test, !sbi_strncmp(a, b, len))
> > > +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT_STREQ(test, a, b, len) SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, !sbi_strncmp(a, b, len))
> > > +
> > > +void run_all_tests(void);
> > > +#endif
> > > +#else
> > > +#define run_all_tests()
> > > +#endif
> > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/Kconfig b/lib/sbi/Kconfig
> > > index 81dd2db..e3038ee 100644
> > > --- a/lib/sbi/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/lib/sbi/Kconfig
> > > @@ -50,4 +50,8 @@ config SBI_ECALL_DBTR
> > >   	bool "Debug Trigger Extension"
> > >   	default y
> > > +config SBIUNIT
> > > +	bool "Enable SBIUNIT tests"
> > > +	default n
> > > +
> > >   endmenu
> > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/objects.mk b/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> > > index 0a50e95..08959f1 100644
> > > --- a/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> > > +++ b/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> > > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ libsbi-objs-y += riscv_asm.o
> > >   libsbi-objs-y += riscv_atomic.o
> > >   libsbi-objs-y += riscv_hardfp.o
> > >   libsbi-objs-y += riscv_locks.o
> > > +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_test.o
> > > +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_tests.o
> > >   libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall.o
> > >   libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall_exts.o
> > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_init.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_init.c
> > > index 804b01c..796cccc 100644
> > > --- a/lib/sbi/sbi_init.c
> > > +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_init.c
> > > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> > >   #include <sbi/sbi_timer.h>
> > >   #include <sbi/sbi_tlb.h>
> > >   #include <sbi/sbi_version.h>
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h>
> > >   #define BANNER                                              \
> > >   	"   ____                    _____ ____ _____\n"     \
> > > @@ -398,6 +399,8 @@ static void __noreturn init_coldboot(struct sbi_scratch *scratch, u32 hartid)
> > >   	sbi_boot_print_hart(scratch, hartid);
> > > +	run_all_tests();
> > > +
> > >   	/*
> > >   	 * Configure PMP at last because if SMEPMP is detected,
> > >   	 * M-mode access to the S/U space will be rescinded.
> > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_unit_test.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_unit_test.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..f4988d8
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_unit_test.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
> > > +/*
> > > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause
> > > + *
> > > + * Author: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
> > > + */
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h>
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_types.h>
> > > +#include <sbi/sbi_console.h>
> > > +
> > > +extern struct sbiunit_test_suite *sbi_unit_tests[];
> > > +extern unsigned long sbi_unit_tests_size;
> > > +
> > > +static void run_test_suite(struct sbiunit_test_suite *suite)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct sbiunit_test_case *s_case;
> > > +	u32 count_pass = 0, count_fail = 0;
> > > +
> > > +	sbi_printf("## Running test suite: %s\n", suite->name);
> > > +
> > > +	s_case = suite->cases;
> > > +	while (s_case->enabled) {
> > 
> > Can't test cases be enabled/disabled sparsely? Shouldn't we instead
> > loop while s_case->name is not NULL? And we need to ensure the cases
> > array always has an empty case at the end.
> > 
> 
> They can't be enabled/disabled separately at the moment, but I believe it
> would be good to have such a functionality in the future, when we have more
> tests. Also, I reckon we should be able to iterate and execute the test even
> if it has no name: technically it doesn't mean that the test is invalid, and
> breaking the tests execution completely in this case would be pretty
> implicit and non-obvious for the test developer...

If a no-name test is OK, then the stop condition should be
s_case->test_func being NULL.

Thanks,
drew

> 
> Thank you for the review!
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> Ivan Orlov
>