Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] gpu/tests/gpu_buddy: Add KUnit test for gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Unused-but-set variable `target_addr` triggers compiler warning and indicates untested dynamic address.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH V2 2/2] gpu/tests/gpu_buddy: Add KUnit test for gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block ---
commit 6c61f24067cbdd29a5bf648a9a91a04477bc909c
Author: Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>

gpu/tests/gpu_buddy: Add KUnit test for gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block

This commit adds a new KUnit test gpu_test_buddy_addr_to_block() to validate
the gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block() helper. The test verifies exact
address matching, unallocated addresses, and out-of-bounds addresses.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c b/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
> index 89698563c61b2..826a309697ed3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1422,6 +1422,48 @@ static void gpu_test_buddy_alloc_exceeds_max_order(struct kunit *test)
>  	gpu_buddy_fini(&mm);
>  }
>  
> +static void gpu_test_buddy_addr_to_block(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	struct gpu_buddy_block *allocated_block, *found_block;
> +	LIST_HEAD(allocated_list);
> +	const u64 test_size = SZ_4M + SZ_2M;
> +	const u64 alloc_start = SZ_4M;
> +	const u64 alloc_size = SZ_4K;
> +	const u64 chunk_size = SZ_4K;
> +	struct gpu_buddy mm;
> +	u64 target_addr;
> +
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test, gpu_buddy_init(&mm, test_size, chunk_size),
> +			       "buddy_init failed\n");
> +
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test, gpu_buddy_alloc_blocks(&mm, alloc_start,
> +							    alloc_start + alloc_size,
> +							    alloc_size, chunk_size,
> +							    &allocated_list, 0),
> +			       "buddy_alloc failed\n");
> +
> +	allocated_block = list_first_entry(&allocated_list, struct gpu_buddy_block, link);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, gpu_buddy_block_offset(allocated_block), alloc_start);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, gpu_buddy_block_size(&mm, allocated_block), alloc_size);
> +	target_addr = gpu_buddy_block_offset(allocated_block);
> +
> +	found_block = gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block(&mm, alloc_start);

[Severity: Low]
Is target_addr intentionally left unused here? It is assigned the offset
of the allocated block, but alloc_start is passed directly to
gpu_buddy_allocated_addr_to_block() instead. This might trigger a compiler
warning for an unused-but-set variable and suggests the test could be
bypassing the dynamic address it intended to validate.

> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, found_block, allocated_block);

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260728114923.2675866-4-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com?part=2