linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] kunit: tool: stop using bare asserts in unit test

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]

Date:   Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:05:35 +0800
From:   David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] kunit: tool: stop using bare asserts in unit test

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:09 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Use self.assertEqual/assertNotEqual() instead.
> Besides being more appropriate in a unit test, it'll also give a better
> error message by show the unexpected values.
>
> Also
> * Delete redundant check of exception types. self.assertRaises does this.
> * s/kall/call. There's no reason to name it this way.
>   * This is probably a misunderstanding from the docs which uses it
>   since `mock.call` is in scope as `call`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
> ---

Looks good, thanks!

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>


-- David