linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/6] kunit: move check if assertion passed into the macros

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: <20220108012304.1049587-3-dlatypov@google.com>
Date:   Fri,  7 Jan 2022 17:23:00 -0800
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To:     brendanhiggins@...gle.com, davidgow@...gle.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] kunit: move check if assertion passed into the macros

Currently the code always calls kunit_do_assertion() even though it does
nothing when `pass` is true.

This change moves the `if(!(pass))` check into the macro instead
and renames the function to kunit_failed_assertion().
I feel this a  bit easier to read and understand.

This has the potential upside of avoiding a function call that does
nothing most of the time (assuming your tests are passing) but comes
with the downside of generating a bit more code and branches.

This also means we don't have to initialize structs that we don't need,
which will become a tiny bit more expensive if we switch over to using
static variables to try and reduce stack usage. (There's runtime code
to check if the variable has been initialized yet or not).

Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
---
 include/kunit/test.h | 20 ++++++++++----------
 lib/kunit/test.c     | 13 ++++---------
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
index b26400731c02..690a28dfc795 100644
--- a/include/kunit/test.h
+++ b/include/kunit/test.h
@@ -770,18 +770,18 @@ void __printf(2, 3) kunit_log_append(char *log, const char *fmt, ...);
  */
 #define KUNIT_SUCCEED(test) do {} while (0)
 
-void kunit_do_assertion(struct kunit *test,
-			struct kunit_assert *assert,
-			bool pass,
-			const char *fmt, ...);
+void kunit_failed_assertion(struct kunit *test,
+			    struct kunit_assert *assert,
+			    const char *fmt, ...);
 
 #define KUNIT_ASSERTION(test, pass, assert_class, INITIALIZER, fmt, ...) do {  \
-	struct assert_class __assertion = INITIALIZER;			       \
-	kunit_do_assertion(test,					       \
-			   &__assertion.assert,				       \
-			   pass,					       \
-			   fmt,						       \
-			   ##__VA_ARGS__);				       \
+	if (!(pass)) {							       \
+		struct assert_class __assertion = INITIALIZER;		       \
+		kunit_failed_assertion(test,				       \
+				       &__assertion.assert,		       \
+				       fmt,				       \
+				       ##__VA_ARGS__);			       \
+	}								       \
 } while (0)
 
 
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c
index c7ed4aabec04..5ad671745483 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
@@ -275,16 +275,11 @@ static void __noreturn kunit_abort(struct kunit *test)
 	WARN_ONCE(true, "Throw could not abort from test!\n");
 }
 
-void kunit_do_assertion(struct kunit *test,
-			struct kunit_assert *assert,
-			bool pass,
-			const char *fmt, ...)
+void kunit_failed_assertion(struct kunit *test,
+			    struct kunit_assert *assert,
+			    const char *fmt, ...)
 {
 	va_list args;
-
-	if (pass)
-		return;
-
 	va_start(args, fmt);
 
 	assert->message.fmt = fmt;
@@ -297,7 +292,7 @@ void kunit_do_assertion(struct kunit *test,
 	if (assert->type == KUNIT_ASSERTION)
 		kunit_abort(test);
 }
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_do_assertion);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_failed_assertion);
 
 void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log)
 {
-- 
2.34.1.575.g55b058a8bb-goog