linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v4 10/17] kunit: test: add test managed resource tests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <155026408761.115909.17855438744578437385@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:54:47 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        frowand.list@...il.com, keescook@...gle.com,
        kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        robh@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, joel@....id.au, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        joe@...ches.com, brakmo@...com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        Tim.Bird@...y.com, khilman@...libre.com, julia.lawall@...6.fr,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jdike@...toit.com, richard@....at,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, daniel@...ll.ch,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, knut.omang@...cle.com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, pmladek@...e.com,
        Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com, amir73il@...il.com,
        dan.carpenter@...cle.com, wfg@...ux.intel.com,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Avinash Kondareddy <avikr@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 10/17] kunit: test: add test managed resource tests

Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-02-14 13:37:22)
> diff --git a/kunit/test-test.c b/kunit/test-test.c
> index 0b4ad6690310d..bb34431398526 100644
> --- a/kunit/test-test.c
> +++ b/kunit/test-test.c
[...]
> +
> +#define KUNIT_RESOURCE_NUM 5
> +static void kunit_resource_test_cleanup_resources(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +       int i;
> +       struct kunit_test_resource_context *ctx = test->priv;
> +       struct kunit_resource *resources[KUNIT_RESOURCE_NUM];
> +
> +       for (i = 0; i < KUNIT_RESOURCE_NUM; i++) {

Nitpick: This could use ARRAY_SIZE(resources) and then the #define could
be dropped.

> +               resources[i] = kunit_alloc_resource(&ctx->test,
> +                                                   fake_resource_init,
> +                                                   fake_resource_free,
> +                                                   ctx);
> +       }
> +
> +       kunit_cleanup(&ctx->test);
> +
> +       KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty(&ctx->test.resources));
> +}
> +
[...]
> +
> +static struct kunit_case kunit_resource_test_cases[] = {

Can these arrays be const?

> +       KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_init_resources),
> +       KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_alloc_resource),
> +       KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_free_resource),
> +       KUNIT_CASE(kunit_resource_test_cleanup_resources),
> +       {},
> +};