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 Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qLQpI-004VhD-35 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2023 16:11:58 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1b9e93a538dso25015035ad.3 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2023 09:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 09:11:50 -0700 From: Yury Norov Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] lib/test_bitmap: add tests for bitmap_{set,get}_value() Message-ID: References: <20230717113709.328671-1-glider@google.com> <20230717113709.328671-3-glider@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230717113709.328671-3-glider@google.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+lwn-linux-arm-kernel=archive.lwn.net@lists.infradead.org List-Archive: To: Alexander Potapenko Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, pcc@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, eugenis@google.com, syednwaris@gmail.com, william.gray@linaro.org On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 01:37:05PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > Add basic tests ensuring that values can be added at arbitrary positions > of the bitmap, including those spanning into the adjacent unsigned > longs. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko Thanks for the test! > --- > This patch was previously called > "lib/test_bitmap: add tests for bitmap_{set,get}_value_unaligned" > > v3: > - switch to using bitmap_{set,get}_value() > - change the expected bit pattern in test_set_get_value(), > as the test was incorrectly assuming 0 is the LSB. > --- > lib/test_bitmap.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lib/test_bitmap.c b/lib/test_bitmap.c > index 187f5b2db4cf1..c2ab54040c249 100644 > --- a/lib/test_bitmap.c > +++ b/lib/test_bitmap.c > @@ -71,6 +71,17 @@ __check_eq_uint(const char *srcfile, unsigned int line, > return true; > } > > +static bool __init > +__check_eq_ulong(const char *srcfile, unsigned int line, > + const unsigned long exp_ulong, unsigned long x) > +{ > + if (exp_ulong != x) { > + pr_err("[%s:%u] expected %lu, got %lu\n", > + srcfile, line, exp_ulong, x); > + return false; > + } > + return true; > +} > > static bool __init > __check_eq_bitmap(const char *srcfile, unsigned int line, > @@ -186,6 +197,7 @@ __check_eq_str(const char *srcfile, unsigned int line, > }) > > #define expect_eq_uint(...) __expect_eq(uint, ##__VA_ARGS__) > +#define expect_eq_ulong(...) __expect_eq(ulong, ##__VA_ARGS__) > #define expect_eq_bitmap(...) __expect_eq(bitmap, ##__VA_ARGS__) > #define expect_eq_pbl(...) __expect_eq(pbl, ##__VA_ARGS__) > #define expect_eq_u32_array(...) __expect_eq(u32_array, ##__VA_ARGS__) > @@ -1222,6 +1234,25 @@ static void __init test_bitmap_const_eval(void) > BUILD_BUG_ON(~var != ~BIT(25)); > } > > +static void __init test_set_get_value(void) > +{ > + DECLARE_BITMAP(bitmap, BITS_PER_LONG * 2); It's too short. Can you make it long enough to ensure it works as expected when start is not in the 1st word, and start+nbits is in the following word. > + unsigned long val; > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < BITS_PER_LONG * 2 - 7; i++) { > + bitmap_zero(bitmap, BITS_PER_LONG * 2); > + bitmap_set_value(bitmap, 0b10101UL, i, 5); > + val = bitmap_get_value(bitmap, i, 5); > + expect_eq_ulong(0b10101UL, val); Can you also check that the rest of bitmap is untouched? Something like: DECLARE_BITMAP(bitmap, ...); DECLARE_BITMAP(orig, ...); memset(orig, 0x5a, ...); memset(bitmap, 0x5a, ...); for (j = start; j < start + nbits; j++) if (val & BIT(j - start)) __set_bit(j, orig); else __clear_bit(j, orig); bitmap_set_value(bitmap, val, start, nbits); expect_eq_bitmap(orig, bitmap, ...); I like this kind of testing because it gives people a better understanding of what happens behind all that optimization tricks. Thanks, Yury _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel