From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 14:55:21 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] lib: Add SBIUnit testing macros and functions
In-Reply-To: <20240213-c191a5bbf346ab3ca994f464@orel>
References: <20240208095050.398522-1-ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
 <20240208095050.398522-2-ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com>
 <20240212-5d311c79e606a9d510631934@orel>
 <5be9d29f-08d8-40fe-adf0-7ced03303705@gmail.com>
 <20240213-c191a5bbf346ab3ca994f464@orel>
Message-ID: <43e91abd-049e-433e-a48d-0a4779232ee8@gmail.com>
List-Id: <opensbi.lists.infradead.org>
To: opensbi@lists.infradead.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2/13/24 14:00, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:03:52PM +0000, Ivan Orlov wrote:
>> On 2/12/24 17:36, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 09:50:48AM +0000, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> ...
>>>> +#define SBIUNIT_ASSERT(test, cond) do {						\
>>>> +	if (!(cond)) {								\
>>>> +		test->result = 0;						\
>>>> +		SBIUNIT_INFO(test, "Condition \"" #cond "\" must be true!\n");	\
>>>> +		return;								\
>>>
>>> Unnecessary 'return'. It's strange that an ASSERT macro doesn't result in
>>> an sbi_panic().
>>>
>>
>> I thought it would be bad if test results in hang, but if it is ok I will
>> rewrite it.
> 
> I think an assert should output its message and then stop all execution.
> Asserts should only be used in situations where failures mean the
> test programmer made an improper assumption. If we don't halt the moment
> we determine the assumption is wrong, then we'll potentially generate
> passing test results, but the tests may not be testing what the test
> programmer thought they were.
> 

Makes sense, so let's add the sbi_panic in version 2.

Thanks!

-- 
Kind regards,
Ivan Orlov