From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brendan Higgins Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 00/18] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 11:24:50 -0700 Message-ID: <20190820182450.GA38078@google.com> References: <20190814055108.214253-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <5b880f49-0213-1a6e-9c9f-153e6ab91eeb@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5b880f49-0213-1a6e-9c9f-153e6ab91eeb@kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: shuah Cc: frowand.list@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, keescook@google.com, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, robh@kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com, Tim.Bird@sony.com, amir73il@gmail.com, dan.carpenter@oracle.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, jdike@addtoit.com, joel@jms.id.au, julia.lawall@lip6.fr, khilman@baylibre.com, knut.omang@oracle.com, logang@deltatee.com, mp List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:24:45AM -0600, shuah wrote: > On 8/13/19 11:50 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > ## TL;DR > > > > This revision addresses comments from Stephen and Bjorn Helgaas. Most > > changes are pretty minor stuff that doesn't affect the API in anyway. > > One significant change, however, is that I added support for freeing > > kunit_resource managed resources before the test case is finished via > > kunit_resource_destroy(). Additionally, Bjorn pointed out that I broke > > KUnit on certain configurations (like the default one for x86, whoops). > > > > Based on Stephen's feedback on the previous change, I think we are > > pretty close. I am not expecting any significant changes from here on > > out. > > > > Hi Brendan, > > I found checkpatch errors in one or two patches. Can you fix those and > send v14. Hi Shuah, Are you refering to the following errors? ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses #144: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:456: +#define KUNIT_BINARY_CLASS \ + kunit_binary_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses #146: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:458: +#define KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_CLASS \ + kunit_binary_ptr_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_PTR_ASSERT_STRUCT These values should *not* be in parentheses. I am guessing checkpatch is getting confused and thinks that these are complex expressions, when they are not. I ignored the errors since I figured checkpatch was complaining erroneously. I could refactor the code to remove these macros entirely, but I think the code is cleaner with them. What would you prefer I do? NB: These macros are introduced in: "[PATCH v13 05/18] kunit: test: add the concept of expectations" Thanks!