Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] lib/cmdline_kunit: add a new test case for get_options()

[Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:45 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Add a test case for get_options() which is provided by cmdline.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/cmdline_kunit.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c
> index 550e7a47fd24..74da9ed61779 100644
> --- a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c
> +++ b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,26 @@ static const int cmdline_test_values[] = {
>         1, 3, 2, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1,
>  };
>
> +static_assert(ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_strings) == ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_values));
> +
> +static const char *cmdline_test_range_strings[] = {
> +       "-7" , "--7"  , "-1-2"    , "7--9",
> +       "7-" , "-7--9", "7-9,"    , "9-7" ,
> +       "5-a", "a-5"  , "5-8"     , ",8-5",
> +       "+,1", "-,4"  , "-3,0-1,6", "4,-" ,
> +       " +2", " -9"  , "0-1,-3,6", "- 9" ,
> +};
> +
> +static const int cmdline_test_range_values[][16] = {
> +       { 1, -7, }, { 0, -0, }, { 4, -1, 0, +1, 2, }, { 0, 7, },
> +       { 0, +7, }, { 0, -7, }, { 3, +7, 8, +9, 0, }, { 0, 9, },
> +       { 0, +5, }, { 0, -0, }, { 4, +5, 6, +7, 8, }, { 0, 0, },
> +       { 0, +0, }, { 0, -0, }, { 4, -3, 0, +1, 6, }, { 1, 4, },
> +       { 0, +0, }, { 0, -0, }, { 4, +0, 1, -3, 6, }, { 0, 0, },
> +};
> +
> +static_assert(ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_range_strings) == ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_range_values));
> +
>  static void cmdline_do_one_test(struct kunit *test, const char *in, int rc, int offset)
>  {
>         const char *fmt = "Pattern: %s";
> @@ -84,10 +104,42 @@ static void cmdline_test_tail_int(struct kunit *test)
>         } while (++i < ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_strings));
>  }
>
> +static void cmdline_do_one_range_test(struct kunit *test, const char *in,
> +                                     unsigned int n, const int *e)
> +{
> +       unsigned int i;
> +       int r[16];
> +
> +#define FMT    "in test %u"
> +#define FMT2   "expected %d numbers, got %d"
> +#define FMT3   "at %d"
> +       memset(r, 0, sizeof(r));
> +       get_options(in, ARRAY_SIZE(r), r);
> +       KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]);
> +       for (i = 1; i < ARRAY_SIZE(r); i++)
> +               KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[i], e[i], FMT " " FMT3, n, i);
> +#undef FMT3
> +#undef FMT2
> +#undef FMT

IMO these FMT macros are super confusing, please just use hardcoded
strings because you're not saving any code anyway.

Bart

> +}
> +
> +static void cmdline_test_range(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +       unsigned int i = 0;
> +
> +       do {
> +               const char *str = cmdline_test_range_strings[i];
> +               const int *e = cmdline_test_range_values[i];
> +
> +               cmdline_do_one_range_test(test, str, i, e);
> +       } while (++i < ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_test_range_strings));
> +}
> +
>  static struct kunit_case cmdline_test_cases[] = {
>         KUNIT_CASE(cmdline_test_noint),
>         KUNIT_CASE(cmdline_test_lead_int),
>         KUNIT_CASE(cmdline_test_tail_int),
> +       KUNIT_CASE(cmdline_test_range),
>         {}
>  };
>
> --
> 2.29.2
>