[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFd5g4728mSzJXhFFRLrUcprTW52-1ECOJT8FvH3gyQWxktZwg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 17:10:16 -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
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() use KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(),
etc.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 5:35 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> There's quite a few macros in play for KUnit assertions.
>
> The current macro chain looks like:
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
> KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
> KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
>
> After this change:
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ => KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
> KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ => KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG => KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_MSG_ASSERTION
> and we can drop the intermediate KUNIT_BINARY_EQ_ASSERTION.
>
> This change does this for all the other macros as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists