From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: "Maciej Wieczór-Retman" <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>
Cc: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] selftests/resctrl: Cleanup benchmark argument parsing
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:04:29 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f31c39-41ce-2dc2-26e7-62466abdac2@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eetulhaho6ci25ahafo5qn4hag2ldnztnerxpmtuvh6vp2qlfn@lkazlrcje5sl>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2750 bytes --]
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023, Maciej Wieczór-Retman wrote:
> On 2023-08-23 at 16:15:56 +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> >Benchmark argument is handled by custom argument parsing code which is
> >more complicated than it needs to be.
> >
> >Process benchmark argument within the normal getopt() handling and drop
> >entirely unnecessary ben_ind and has_ben variables. If -b is not given,
> >setup the default benchmark command right after the switch statement
> >and make -b to goto over it while it terminates the getopt() loop.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
> >Reviewed-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> >---
> > .../testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c | 71 ++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
> >index 94516d1f4307..ae9001ef7b0a 100644
> >--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
> >+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
> >@@ -169,28 +169,35 @@ static void run_cat_test(int cpu_no, int no_of_bits)
> >
> > int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> >- bool has_ben = false, mbm_test = true, mba_test = true, cmt_test = true;
> >- int c, cpu_no = 1, argc_new = argc, i, no_of_bits = 0;
> >+ bool mbm_test = true, mba_test = true, cmt_test = true;
> >+ int c, cpu_no = 1, i, no_of_bits = 0;
> > const char *benchmark_cmd[BENCHMARK_ARGS];
> >- int ben_ind, tests = 0;
> > char *span_str = NULL;
> > bool cat_test = true;
> > char *skip_reason;
> >+ int tests = 0;
> > int ret;
> >
> >- for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) {
> >- if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0) {
> >- ben_ind = i + 1;
> >- argc_new = ben_ind - 1;
> >- has_ben = true;
> >- break;
> >- }
> >- }
> >-
> >- while ((c = getopt(argc_new, argv, "ht:b:n:p:")) != -1) {
> >+ while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "ht:b:n:p:")) != -1) {
> > char *token;
> >
> > switch (c) {
> >+ case 'b':
> >+ /*
> >+ * First move optind back to the (first) optarg and
> >+ * then build the benchmark command using the
> >+ * remaining arguments.
> >+ */
> >+ optind--;
> >+ if (argc - optind >= BENCHMARK_ARGS - 1)
> >+ ksft_exit_fail_msg("Too long benchmark command");
>
> Isn't this condition off by two?
>
> I did some testing and the maximum amount of benchmark arguments is 62
> while the array of const char* has 64 spaces. Is it supposed to have
> less than the maximum capacity?
>
> Wouldn't something like this be more valid with BENCHMARK_ARGS equal to
> 64? :
> if (argc - optind > BENCHMARK_ARGS)
Certainly not off by two as the array must be NULL terminated but it seems
to be off-by-one (to the safe direction), yes.
--
i.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-29 13:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-23 13:15 [PATCH v3 0/7] selftests/resctrl: Rework benchmark command handling Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] selftests/resctrl: Ensure the benchmark commands fits to its array Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] selftests/resctrl: Correct benchmark command help Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-30 0:53 ` Reinette Chatre
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] selftests/resctrl: Remove bw_report and bm_type from main() Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] selftests/resctrl: Simplify span lifetime Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] selftests/resctrl: Make benchmark command const and build it with pointers Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-30 0:53 ` Reinette Chatre
2023-08-30 8:59 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-30 17:47 ` Reinette Chatre
2023-08-31 7:10 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] selftests/resctrl: Remove ben_count variable Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-23 13:15 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] selftests/resctrl: Cleanup benchmark argument parsing Ilpo Järvinen
2023-08-29 12:48 ` Maciej Wieczór-Retman
2023-08-29 13:04 ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2023-08-29 13:23 ` Maciej Wieczór-Retman
2023-08-25 8:36 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] selftests/resctrl: Rework benchmark command handling Shaopeng Tan (Fujitsu)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f31c39-41ce-2dc2-26e7-62466abdac2@linux.intel.com \
--to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).