Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] test_bits: add tests for __GENMASK() and __GENMASK_ULL()

Lucas De Marchi
2025-03-13T13:15:46Z

On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 03:00:34PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
>On 13/03/2025 at 13:13, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:56PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
>> wrote:
>>> From: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
>>>
>>> The definitions of GENMASK() and GENMASK_ULL() do not depend any more
>>> on __GENMASK() and __GENMASK_ULL(). Duplicate the existing unit tests
>>> so that __GENMASK{,ULL}() is still covered.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
>>> ---
>>> lib/test_bits.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/test_bits.c b/lib/test_bits.c
>>> index
>>> c7b38d91e1f16d42b7ca92e62fbd6c19b37e76a0..dc93ded9fdb201e0d44b3c1cd71e233fd62258a5 100644
>>> --- a/lib/test_bits.c
>>> +++ b/lib/test_bits.c
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,22 @@
>>> #include <linux/bits.h>
>>>
>>>
>>> +static void __genmask_test(struct kunit *test)
>>> +{
>>> +    KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1ul, __GENMASK(0, 0));
>>> +    KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 3ul, __GENMASK(1, 0));
>>> +    KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 6ul, __GENMASK(2, 1));
>>> +    KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0xFFFFFFFFul, __GENMASK(31, 0));
>>
>> why are you dropping the ones for TEST_GENMASK_FAILURES ?
>
>Because the __GENMASK() and the __GENMASK_ULL() do not use
>GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(), it is not possible to have those
>TEST_GENMASK_FAILURES negative test cases here.
>
>I will add one sentence to the commit message to explain this.

ok, makes sense.

Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>

thanks
Lucas De Marchi