* [PATCH v2 0/1] Add KUnit tests for llist
@ 2024-09-03 21:40 Artur Alves
2024-09-03 21:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add " Artur Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Artur Alves @ 2024-09-03 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, Brendan Higgins, David Gow, Rae Moar,
linux-kselftest, kunit-dev
Cc: n, andrealmeid, vinicius, diego.daniel.professional
Hi all,
This is part of a hackathon organized by LKCAMP[1], focused on writing
tests using KUnit. We reached out a while ago asking for advice on what
would be a useful contribution[2] and ended up choosing data structures
that did not yet have tests.
This patch adds tests for the llist data structure, defined in
include/linux/llist.h, and is inspired by the KUnit tests for the doubly
linked list in lib/list-test.c[3].
It is important to note that this patch depends on the patch referenced
in [4], as it utilizes the newly created lib/tests/ subdirectory.
[1] https://lkcamp.dev/about/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zktnt7rjKryTh9-N@arch/
[3] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/lib/list-test.c
[4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240720181025.work.002-kees@kernel.org/
---
Changes in v2:
- Add MODULE_DESCRIPTION()
- Move the tests from lib/llist_kunit.c to lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
- Change the license from "GPL v2" to "GPL"
Artur Alves (1):
lib/llist_kunit.c: add KUnit tests for llist
lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 ++
lib/tests/Makefile | 1 +
lib/tests/llist_kunit.c | 361 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 373 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
--
2.46.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add KUnit tests for llist
2024-09-03 21:40 [PATCH v2 0/1] Add KUnit tests for llist Artur Alves
@ 2024-09-03 21:40 ` Artur Alves
2024-09-05 20:51 ` Rae Moar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Artur Alves @ 2024-09-03 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, Brendan Higgins, David Gow, Rae Moar,
linux-kselftest, kunit-dev
Cc: n, andrealmeid, vinicius, diego.daniel.professional
Add KUnit tests for the llist data structure. They test the vast
majority of methods and macros defined in include/linux/llist.h.
These are inspired by the existing tests for the 'list' doubly
linked in lib/list-test.c [1]. Each test case (llist_test_x)
tests the behaviour of the llist function/macro 'x'.
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/list-test.c?h=v6.11-rc6
Signed-off-by: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
---
lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 ++
lib/tests/Makefile | 1 +
lib/tests/llist_kunit.c | 361 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 373 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
index a30c03a66172..b2725daccc52 100644
--- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
+++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
@@ -2813,6 +2813,17 @@ config USERCOPY_KUNIT_TEST
on the copy_to/from_user infrastructure, making sure basic
user/kernel boundary testing is working.
+config LLIST_KUNIT_TEST
+ tristate "KUnit tests for lib/llist" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
+ depends on KUNIT
+ default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
+ help
+ This option builds the "llist_kunit" test module that
+ helps to verify the correctness of the functions and
+ macros defined in (<linux/llist.h>).
+
+ If unsure, say N.
+
config TEST_UDELAY
tristate "udelay test driver"
help
diff --git a/lib/tests/Makefile b/lib/tests/Makefile
index c6a14cc8663e..8d7c40a73110 100644
--- a/lib/tests/Makefile
+++ b/lib/tests/Makefile
@@ -34,4 +34,5 @@ CFLAGS_stackinit_kunit.o += $(call cc-disable-warning, switch-unreachable)
obj-$(CONFIG_STACKINIT_KUNIT_TEST) += stackinit_kunit.o
obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_KUNIT_TEST) += string_kunit.o
obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_HELPERS_KUNIT_TEST) += string_helpers_kunit.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_LLIST_KUNIT_TEST) += llist_kunit.o
diff --git a/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..f273c0d175c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
@@ -0,0 +1,361 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * KUnit test for the Kernel lock-less linked-list structure.
+ *
+ * Author: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
+ */
+
+#include <kunit/test.h>
+#include <linux/llist.h>
+
+#define ENTRIES_SIZE 3
+
+struct llist_test_struct {
+ int data;
+ struct llist_node node;
+};
+
+static void llist_test_init_llist(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ /* test if the llist is correctly initialized */
+ struct llist_head llist1 = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist1);
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
+ struct llist_head llist3, *llist4, *llist5;
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist1));
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist2));
+
+ init_llist_head(&llist3);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist3));
+
+ llist4 = kzalloc(sizeof(*llist4), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
+ init_llist_head(llist4);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist4));
+ kfree(llist4);
+
+ llist5 = kmalloc(sizeof(*llist5), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
+ memset(llist5, 0xFF, sizeof(*llist5));
+ init_llist_head(llist5);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist5));
+ kfree(llist5);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_init_llist_node(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a;
+
+ init_llist_node(&a);
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, a.next, &a);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_llist_entry(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_test_struct test_struct, *aux;
+ struct llist_node *llist = &test_struct.node;
+
+ aux = llist_entry(llist, struct llist_test_struct, node);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, &test_struct, aux);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_add(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ init_llist_node(&a);
+ init_llist_node(&b);
+
+ /* The first assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add(&a, &llist));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_add(&b, &llist));
+
+ /* Should be [List] -> b -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &b);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_add_batch(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b, c;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
+
+ init_llist_node(&a);
+ init_llist_node(&b);
+ init_llist_node(&c);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist2);
+ llist_add(&b, &llist2);
+ llist_add(&c, &llist2);
+
+ /* This assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add_batch(&c, &a, &llist));
+
+ /* should be [List] -> c -> b -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &c);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c.next, &b);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_llist_next(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ init_llist_node(&a);
+ init_llist_node(&b);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+ llist_add(&b, &llist);
+
+ /* should be [List] -> b -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist_next(&b), &a);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_next(&a));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_empty_llist(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_head llist = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist);
+ struct llist_node a;
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_llist_on_list(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ init_llist_node(&a);
+ init_llist_node(&b);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+
+ /* should be [List] -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(&a));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(&b));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_del_first(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b, *c;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+ llist_add(&b, &llist);
+
+ /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
+ c = llist_del_first(&llist);
+
+ /* should be [List] -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
+
+ /* del must return a pointer to llist_node b
+ * the returned pointer must be marked on list
+ */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c, &b);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(c));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_del_first_init(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, *b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+
+ b = llist_del_first_init(&llist);
+
+ /* should be [List] */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+
+ /* the returned pointer must be marked out of the list */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(b));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_del_first_this(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+ llist_add(&b, &llist);
+
+ llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a);
+
+ /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
+
+ // should remove only if is the first node in the llist
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a));
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &b));
+
+ /* should be [List] -> a */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_del_all(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node a, b;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ LLIST_HEAD(empty_llist);
+
+ llist_add(&a, &llist);
+ llist_add(&b, &llist);
+
+ /* deleting from a empty llist should return NULL */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_del_all(&empty_llist));
+
+ llist_del_all(&llist);
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_for_each(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
+ struct llist_node *pos, *deleted_nodes;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ int i = 0;
+
+ for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
+ llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
+
+ /* before [List] -> entries[0] -> ... -> entries[ENTRIES_SIZE - 1] */
+ llist_for_each(pos, llist.first) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
+
+ i = 0;
+
+ /* traversing deleted nodes */
+ deleted_nodes = llist_del_all(&llist);
+
+ llist_for_each(pos, deleted_nodes) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
+ struct llist_node *pos, *n;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ int i = 0;
+
+ for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
+ llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
+
+ llist_for_each_safe(pos, n, llist.first) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
+ llist_del_first(&llist);
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_for_each_entry(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ int i = 0;
+
+ for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
+ entries[i].data = i;
+ llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
+ }
+
+ i = 0;
+
+ llist_for_each_entry(pos, llist.first, node) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i);
+ i++;
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
+}
+
+static void llist_test_for_each_entry_safe(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos, *n;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ int i = 0;
+
+ for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
+ entries[i].data = i;
+ llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
+ }
+
+ i = 0;
+
+ llist_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, llist.first, node) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i++);
+ llist_del_first(&llist);
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
+}
+
+static void llist_test_reverse_order(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct llist_node entries[3], *pos, *reversed_llist;
+ LLIST_HEAD(llist);
+ int i = 0;
+
+ llist_add(&entries[0], &llist);
+ llist_add(&entries[1], &llist);
+ llist_add(&entries[2], &llist);
+
+ /* before [List] -> entries[2] -> entries[1] -> entries[0] */
+ reversed_llist = llist_reverse_order(llist_del_first(&llist));
+
+ /* should be [List] -> entries[0] -> entries[1] -> entrires[2] */
+ llist_for_each(pos, reversed_llist) {
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
+ }
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 3, i);
+}
+
+static struct kunit_case llist_test_cases[] = {
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist_node),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_entry),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add_batch),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_next),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_empty_llist),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_on_list),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_init),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_this),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_all),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_safe),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry_safe),
+ KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_reverse_order),
+ {}
+};
+
+static struct kunit_suite llist_test_suite = {
+ .name = "llist",
+ .test_cases = llist_test_cases,
+};
+
+kunit_test_suite(llist_test_suite);
+
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("KUnit tests for the llist data structure.");
--
2.46.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add KUnit tests for llist
2024-09-03 21:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add " Artur Alves
@ 2024-09-05 20:51 ` Rae Moar
2024-09-09 21:04 ` Artur Alves Cavalcante de Barros
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rae Moar @ 2024-09-05 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Artur Alves
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, Brendan Higgins, David Gow,
linux-kselftest, kunit-dev, n, andrealmeid, vinicius,
diego.daniel.professional
On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 5:40 PM Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Add KUnit tests for the llist data structure. They test the vast
> majority of methods and macros defined in include/linux/llist.h.
>
> These are inspired by the existing tests for the 'list' doubly
> linked in lib/list-test.c [1]. Each test case (llist_test_x)
> tests the behaviour of the llist function/macro 'x'.
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/list-test.c?h=v6.11-rc6
>
> Signed-off-by: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
Hello!
Thanks for creating this new test! It looks really good and is passing
all the tests.
My main comment is that this patch is causing some checkpatch warnings:
WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped
commit description?)
#13:
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/list-test.c?h=v6.11-rc6
It's probably fine to ignore this warning as it is a link. But I might
remove the link because it is not absolutely necessary in this case.
WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
#58:
new file mode 100644
ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
#306: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:249:
+static void llist_test_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test)
+{
ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
#325: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:268:
+static void llist_test_for_each_entry(struct kunit *test)
+{
ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
#346: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:289:
+static void llist_test_for_each_entry_safe(struct kunit *test)
+{
These checkpatch errors are mistaken since the open brace should be
where it is. I believe this is getting picked up because of the
"for_each" in the test name. This was fixed for me by rewriting the
test names: from "llist_test_for_each_safe" -> to
"llist_test_safe_for_each", and so on for the other tests with errors.
Sorry it's a pain to change this but I think it is a better fix than
changing the checkpatch script.
> ---
> lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 ++
> lib/tests/Makefile | 1 +
> lib/tests/llist_kunit.c | 361 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 373 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>
> diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> index a30c03a66172..b2725daccc52 100644
> --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> @@ -2813,6 +2813,17 @@ config USERCOPY_KUNIT_TEST
> on the copy_to/from_user infrastructure, making sure basic
> user/kernel boundary testing is working.
>
> +config LLIST_KUNIT_TEST
> + tristate "KUnit tests for lib/llist" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> + depends on KUNIT
> + default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> + help
> + This option builds the "llist_kunit" test module that
> + helps to verify the correctness of the functions and
> + macros defined in (<linux/llist.h>).
Also, I think I would prefer if this description was a bit tweaked.
Saying it builds the "module" is confusing since this test might be
run built-in instead. So maybe something more similar to :
This builds the llist (lock-less list) KUnit test suite. It tests the
API and basic functionality of the macros and functions defined in
<linux/llish.h>.
> +
> + If unsure, say N.
> +
> config TEST_UDELAY
> tristate "udelay test driver"
> help
> diff --git a/lib/tests/Makefile b/lib/tests/Makefile
> index c6a14cc8663e..8d7c40a73110 100644
> --- a/lib/tests/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/tests/Makefile
> @@ -34,4 +34,5 @@ CFLAGS_stackinit_kunit.o += $(call cc-disable-warning, switch-unreachable)
> obj-$(CONFIG_STACKINIT_KUNIT_TEST) += stackinit_kunit.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_KUNIT_TEST) += string_kunit.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_HELPERS_KUNIT_TEST) += string_helpers_kunit.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_LLIST_KUNIT_TEST) += llist_kunit.o
>
> diff --git a/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f273c0d175c7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,361 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit test for the Kernel lock-less linked-list structure.
> + *
> + * Author: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
> + */
> +
> +#include <kunit/test.h>
> +#include <linux/llist.h>
> +
> +#define ENTRIES_SIZE 3
> +
> +struct llist_test_struct {
> + int data;
> + struct llist_node node;
> +};
> +
> +static void llist_test_init_llist(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + /* test if the llist is correctly initialized */
> + struct llist_head llist1 = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist1);
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
> + struct llist_head llist3, *llist4, *llist5;
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist1));
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist2));
> +
> + init_llist_head(&llist3);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist3));
> +
> + llist4 = kzalloc(sizeof(*llist4), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
> + init_llist_head(llist4);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist4));
> + kfree(llist4);
> +
> + llist5 = kmalloc(sizeof(*llist5), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
> + memset(llist5, 0xFF, sizeof(*llist5));
> + init_llist_head(llist5);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist5));
> + kfree(llist5);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_init_llist_node(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a;
> +
> + init_llist_node(&a);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, a.next, &a);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_llist_entry(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_test_struct test_struct, *aux;
> + struct llist_node *llist = &test_struct.node;
> +
> + aux = llist_entry(llist, struct llist_test_struct, node);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, &test_struct, aux);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_add(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + init_llist_node(&a);
> + init_llist_node(&b);
> +
> + /* The first assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add(&a, &llist));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_add(&b, &llist));
> +
> + /* Should be [List] -> b -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &b);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_add_batch(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b, c;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
> +
> + init_llist_node(&a);
> + init_llist_node(&b);
> + init_llist_node(&c);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist2);
> + llist_add(&b, &llist2);
> + llist_add(&c, &llist2);
> +
> + /* This assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add_batch(&c, &a, &llist));
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> c -> b -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &c);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c.next, &b);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_llist_next(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + init_llist_node(&a);
> + init_llist_node(&b);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> b -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist_next(&b), &a);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_next(&a));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_empty_llist(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_head llist = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist);
> + struct llist_node a;
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_llist_on_list(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + init_llist_node(&a);
> + init_llist_node(&b);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(&a));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(&b));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_del_first(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b, *c;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
> +
> + /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
> + c = llist_del_first(&llist);
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
> +
> + /* del must return a pointer to llist_node b
> + * the returned pointer must be marked on list
> + */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c, &b);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(c));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_del_first_init(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, *b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> +
> + b = llist_del_first_init(&llist);
> +
> + /* should be [List] */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +
> + /* the returned pointer must be marked out of the list */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(b));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_del_first_this(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
> +
> + llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a);
> +
> + /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
> +
> + // should remove only if is the first node in the llist
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a));
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &b));
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> a */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_del_all(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node a, b;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + LLIST_HEAD(empty_llist);
> +
> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
> +
> + /* deleting from a empty llist should return NULL */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_del_all(&empty_llist));
> +
> + llist_del_all(&llist);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_for_each(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
> + struct llist_node *pos, *deleted_nodes;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
> + llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
> +
> + /* before [List] -> entries[0] -> ... -> entries[ENTRIES_SIZE - 1] */
> + llist_for_each(pos, llist.first) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
> +
> + i = 0;
This is super nitpicky but I think I would prefer if you set two
variables to zero at the beginning rather than reusing "i". So: int i
= 0, j = 0;
> +
> + /* traversing deleted nodes */
> + deleted_nodes = llist_del_all(&llist);
> +
> + llist_for_each(pos, deleted_nodes) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
I'm not sure if it is necessary to initialize this to be zeros.
> + struct llist_node *pos, *n;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
> + llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
> +
> + llist_for_each_safe(pos, n, llist.first) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
> + llist_del_first(&llist);
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
> + entries[i].data = i;
> + llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
> + }
> +
> + i = 0;
> +
> + llist_for_each_entry(pos, llist.first, node) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i);
> + i++;
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry_safe(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos, *n;
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
> + entries[i].data = i;
> + llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
> + }
> +
> + i = 0;
> +
> + llist_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, llist.first, node) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i++);
> + llist_del_first(&llist);
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
> +}
> +
> +static void llist_test_reverse_order(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct llist_node entries[3], *pos, *reversed_llist;
Rather than using the "3" here I would prefer using the ENTRIES_SIZE.
> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + llist_add(&entries[0], &llist);
> + llist_add(&entries[1], &llist);
> + llist_add(&entries[2], &llist);
> +
> + /* before [List] -> entries[2] -> entries[1] -> entries[0] */
> + reversed_llist = llist_reverse_order(llist_del_first(&llist));
> +
> + /* should be [List] -> entries[0] -> entries[1] -> entrires[2] */
Small typo in this comment: "entries"
> + llist_for_each(pos, reversed_llist) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 3, i);
Same here with the use of the "3".
> +}
> +
> +static struct kunit_case llist_test_cases[] = {
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist_node),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_entry),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add_batch),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_next),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_empty_llist),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_on_list),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_init),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_this),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_all),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_safe),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry_safe),
> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_reverse_order),
> + {}
> +};
> +
> +static struct kunit_suite llist_test_suite = {
> + .name = "llist",
> + .test_cases = llist_test_cases,
> +};
> +
> +kunit_test_suite(llist_test_suite);
> +
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("KUnit tests for the llist data structure.");
> --
> 2.46.0
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20240903214027.77533-2-arturacb%40gmail.com.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add KUnit tests for llist
2024-09-05 20:51 ` Rae Moar
@ 2024-09-09 21:04 ` Artur Alves Cavalcante de Barros
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Artur Alves Cavalcante de Barros @ 2024-09-09 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rae Moar
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, Brendan Higgins, David Gow,
linux-kselftest, kunit-dev, n, andrealmeid, vinicius,
diego.daniel.professional
On 9/5/24 5:51 PM, Rae Moar wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 5:40 PM Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add KUnit tests for the llist data structure. They test the vast
>> majority of methods and macros defined in include/linux/llist.h.
>>
>> These are inspired by the existing tests for the 'list' doubly
>> linked in lib/list-test.c [1]. Each test case (llist_test_x)
>> tests the behaviour of the llist function/macro 'x'.
>>
>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/list-test.c?h=v6.11-rc6
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
>
> Hello!
>
> Thanks for creating this new test! It looks really good and is passing
> all the tests.
>
> My main comment is that this patch is causing some checkpatch warnings:
>
> WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped
> commit description?)
> #13:
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/lib/list-test.c?h=v6.11-rc6
>
> It's probably fine to ignore this warning as it is a link. But I might
> remove the link because it is not absolutely necessary in this case.
>
> WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
> #58:
> new file mode 100644
>
> ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
> #306: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:249:
> +static void llist_test_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test)
> +{
>
> ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
> #325: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:268:
> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry(struct kunit *test)
> +{
>
> ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
> #346: FILE: lib/llist_kunit.c:289:
> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry_safe(struct kunit *test)
> +{
>
> These checkpatch errors are mistaken since the open brace should be
> where it is. I believe this is getting picked up because of the
> "for_each" in the test name. This was fixed for me by rewriting the
> test names: from "llist_test_for_each_safe" -> to
> "llist_test_safe_for_each", and so on for the other tests with errors.
> Sorry it's a pain to change this but I think it is a better fix than
> changing the checkpatch script.
>
>> ---
>> lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 ++
>> lib/tests/Makefile | 1 +
>> lib/tests/llist_kunit.c | 361 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 373 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
>> index a30c03a66172..b2725daccc52 100644
>> --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
>> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
>> @@ -2813,6 +2813,17 @@ config USERCOPY_KUNIT_TEST
>> on the copy_to/from_user infrastructure, making sure basic
>> user/kernel boundary testing is working.
>>
>> +config LLIST_KUNIT_TEST
>> + tristate "KUnit tests for lib/llist" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
>> + depends on KUNIT
>> + default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
>> + help
>> + This option builds the "llist_kunit" test module that
>> + helps to verify the correctness of the functions and
>> + macros defined in (<linux/llist.h>).
>
> Also, I think I would prefer if this description was a bit tweaked.
> Saying it builds the "module" is confusing since this test might be
> run built-in instead. So maybe something more similar to :
>
> This builds the llist (lock-less list) KUnit test suite. It tests the
> API and basic functionality of the macros and functions defined in
> <linux/llish.h>.
>
>> +
>> + If unsure, say N.
>> +
>> config TEST_UDELAY
>> tristate "udelay test driver"
>> help
>> diff --git a/lib/tests/Makefile b/lib/tests/Makefile
>> index c6a14cc8663e..8d7c40a73110 100644
>> --- a/lib/tests/Makefile
>> +++ b/lib/tests/Makefile
>> @@ -34,4 +34,5 @@ CFLAGS_stackinit_kunit.o += $(call cc-disable-warning, switch-unreachable)
>> obj-$(CONFIG_STACKINIT_KUNIT_TEST) += stackinit_kunit.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_KUNIT_TEST) += string_kunit.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_STRING_HELPERS_KUNIT_TEST) += string_helpers_kunit.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_LLIST_KUNIT_TEST) += llist_kunit.o
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..f273c0d175c7
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,361 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/*
>> + * KUnit test for the Kernel lock-less linked-list structure.
>> + *
>> + * Author: Artur Alves <arturacb@gmail.com>
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <kunit/test.h>
>> +#include <linux/llist.h>
>> +
>> +#define ENTRIES_SIZE 3
>> +
>> +struct llist_test_struct {
>> + int data;
>> + struct llist_node node;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_init_llist(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + /* test if the llist is correctly initialized */
>> + struct llist_head llist1 = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist1);
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
>> + struct llist_head llist3, *llist4, *llist5;
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist1));
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist2));
>> +
>> + init_llist_head(&llist3);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist3));
>> +
>> + llist4 = kzalloc(sizeof(*llist4), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
>> + init_llist_head(llist4);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist4));
>> + kfree(llist4);
>> +
>> + llist5 = kmalloc(sizeof(*llist5), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
>> + memset(llist5, 0xFF, sizeof(*llist5));
>> + init_llist_head(llist5);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(llist5));
>> + kfree(llist5);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_init_llist_node(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a;
>> +
>> + init_llist_node(&a);
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, a.next, &a);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_llist_entry(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_test_struct test_struct, *aux;
>> + struct llist_node *llist = &test_struct.node;
>> +
>> + aux = llist_entry(llist, struct llist_test_struct, node);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, &test_struct, aux);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_add(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + init_llist_node(&a);
>> + init_llist_node(&b);
>> +
>> + /* The first assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add(&a, &llist));
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_add(&b, &llist));
>> +
>> + /* Should be [List] -> b -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &b);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_add_batch(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b, c;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist2);
>> +
>> + init_llist_node(&a);
>> + init_llist_node(&b);
>> + init_llist_node(&c);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist2);
>> + llist_add(&b, &llist2);
>> + llist_add(&c, &llist2);
>> +
>> + /* This assertion must be true, given that llist is empty */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_add_batch(&c, &a, &llist));
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> c -> b -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &c);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c.next, &b);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.next, &a);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_llist_next(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + init_llist_node(&a);
>> + init_llist_node(&b);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> b -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist_next(&b), &a);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_next(&a));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_empty_llist(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_head llist = LLIST_HEAD_INIT(llist);
>> + struct llist_node a;
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_llist_on_list(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + init_llist_node(&a);
>> + init_llist_node(&b);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(&a));
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(&b));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_del_first(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b, *c;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
>> +
>> + /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
>> + c = llist_del_first(&llist);
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
>> +
>> + /* del must return a pointer to llist_node b
>> + * the returned pointer must be marked on list
>> + */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, c, &b);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_on_list(c));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_del_first_init(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, *b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> +
>> + b = llist_del_first_init(&llist);
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +
>> + /* the returned pointer must be marked out of the list */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_on_list(b));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_del_first_this(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
>> +
>> + llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a);
>> +
>> + /* before: [List] -> b -> a */
>> +
>> + // should remove only if is the first node in the llist
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &a));
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_del_first_this(&llist, &b));
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> a */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, llist.first, &a);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_del_all(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node a, b;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + LLIST_HEAD(empty_llist);
>> +
>> + llist_add(&a, &llist);
>> + llist_add(&b, &llist);
>> +
>> + /* deleting from a empty llist should return NULL */
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_NULL(test, llist_del_all(&empty_llist));
>> +
>> + llist_del_all(&llist);
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_for_each(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
>> + struct llist_node *pos, *deleted_nodes;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + int i = 0;
>> +
>> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
>> + llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
>> +
>> + /* before [List] -> entries[0] -> ... -> entries[ENTRIES_SIZE - 1] */
>> + llist_for_each(pos, llist.first) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
>> +
>> + i = 0;
>
> This is super nitpicky but I think I would prefer if you set two
> variables to zero at the beginning rather than reusing "i". So: int i
> = 0, j = 0;
>
>> +
>> + /* traversing deleted nodes */
>> + deleted_nodes = llist_del_all(&llist);
>> +
>> + llist_for_each(pos, deleted_nodes) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node entries[ENTRIES_SIZE] = { 0 };
>
> I'm not sure if it is necessary to initialize this to be zeros.
>
>> + struct llist_node *pos, *n;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + int i = 0;
>> +
>> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; i--)
>> + llist_add(&entries[i], &llist);
>> +
>> + llist_for_each_safe(pos, n, llist.first) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
>> + llist_del_first(&llist);
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + int i = 0;
>> +
>> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
>> + entries[i].data = i;
>> + llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
>> + }
>> +
>> + i = 0;
>> +
>> + llist_for_each_entry(pos, llist.first, node) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i);
>> + i++;
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_for_each_entry_safe(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_test_struct entries[ENTRIES_SIZE], *pos, *n;
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + int i = 0;
>> +
>> + for (int i = ENTRIES_SIZE - 1; i >= 0; --i) {
>> + entries[i].data = i;
>> + llist_add(&entries[i].node, &llist);
>> + }
>> +
>> + i = 0;
>> +
>> + llist_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, llist.first, node) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, pos->data, i++);
>> + llist_del_first(&llist);
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ENTRIES_SIZE, i);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, llist_empty(&llist));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void llist_test_reverse_order(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct llist_node entries[3], *pos, *reversed_llist;
>
> Rather than using the "3" here I would prefer using the ENTRIES_SIZE.
>
>> + LLIST_HEAD(llist);
>> + int i = 0;
>> +
>> + llist_add(&entries[0], &llist);
>> + llist_add(&entries[1], &llist);
>> + llist_add(&entries[2], &llist);
>> +
>> + /* before [List] -> entries[2] -> entries[1] -> entries[0] */
>> + reversed_llist = llist_reverse_order(llist_del_first(&llist));
>> +
>> + /* should be [List] -> entries[0] -> entries[1] -> entrires[2] */
>
> Small typo in this comment: "entries"
>
>> + llist_for_each(pos, reversed_llist) {
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, pos, &entries[i++]);
>> + }
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 3, i);
>
> Same here with the use of the "3".
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct kunit_case llist_test_cases[] = {
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_init_llist_node),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_entry),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_add_batch),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_next),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_empty_llist),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_llist_on_list),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_init),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_first_this),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_del_all),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_safe),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_for_each_entry_safe),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(llist_test_reverse_order),
>> + {}
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct kunit_suite llist_test_suite = {
>> + .name = "llist",
>> + .test_cases = llist_test_cases,
>> +};
>> +
>> +kunit_test_suite(llist_test_suite);
>> +
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("KUnit tests for the llist data structure.");
>> --
>> 2.46.0
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20240903214027.77533-2-arturacb%40gmail.com.
Hi!
Thanks for the reply! I'm going to address these issues ASAP :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-09-09 21:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-09-03 21:40 [PATCH v2 0/1] Add KUnit tests for llist Artur Alves
2024-09-03 21:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/llist_kunit.c: add " Artur Alves
2024-09-05 20:51 ` Rae Moar
2024-09-09 21:04 ` Artur Alves Cavalcante de Barros
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.