Re: [PATCH 1/4] test: update alarm test

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 12:07:12PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> This test should be using the TEST_ASSERT macros, and can be
> run as part of the fast test suite now.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> ---
>  app/test/test_alarm.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++---------------------------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test/test_alarm.c b/app/test/test_alarm.c
> index 70e97a3109..4ba8aa1af2 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_alarm.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_alarm.c
> @@ -10,7 +10,8 @@
>  
>  #include "test.h"
>  
> -#ifndef RTE_EXEC_ENV_WINDOWS
> +#define US_PER_SEC 1000000
> +
>  static volatile int flag;
>  
>  static void
> @@ -19,46 +20,32 @@ test_alarm_callback(void *cb_arg)
>  	flag = 1;
>  	printf("Callback setting flag - OK. [cb_arg = %p]\n", cb_arg);
>  }
> -#endif
>  
>  static int
>  test_alarm(void)
>  {
> -#ifdef RTE_EXEC_ENV_FREEBSD
> -	printf("The alarm API is not supported on FreeBSD\n");
> -	return 0;
> -#endif
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = rte_eal_alarm_set(0, test_alarm_callback, NULL);
> +	TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(ret, "should not be succeed with 0 us value");
> +
> +	ret = rte_eal_alarm_set(UINT64_MAX - 1, test_alarm_callback, NULL);
> +	TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(ret, "should not be succeed with (UINT64_MAX-1) us value");
> +
> +	ret = rte_eal_alarm_set(10, NULL, NULL);
> +	TEST_ASSERT_FAIL(ret, "should not succeed with null callback parameter");
>  

+1 to use of TEST_ASSERT_FAIL, the test is a lot cleaner now.
However, I think we still need the #ifdefs in it if some of it doesn't work
on Windows/BSD.

/Bruce