linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] kunit: add example test case showing off all the expect 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]

Date:   Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:13:59 -0500
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     davidgow@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] kunit: add example test case showing off all the
 expect macros

On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 8:23 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Currently, these macros are only really documented near the bottom of
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.html#c.KUNIT_FAIL.
>
> E.g. it's likely someone might just not realize that
> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() exists and instead use KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(strcmp())
> or similar.
>
> This can also serve as a basic smoketest that the KUnit assert machinery
> still works for all the macros.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>

I still don't like how much this bloats the example test; aside from
that, this looks good.

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>