[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yf52WjnmA17wQ5p7@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2022 15:06:34 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] list: test: Add a test for list_is_head()
On Sat, Feb 05, 2022 at 02:15:37PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> list_is_head() was added recently[1], and didn't have a KUnit test. The
> implementation is trivial, so it's not a particularly exciting test, but
> it'd be nice to get back to full coverage of the list functions.
>
> [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/include/linux/list.h?id=0425473037db40d9e322631f2d4dc6ef51f97e88
...
> +static void list_test_list_is_head(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct list_head a, b;
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_is_head(&a, &a));
OK.
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, list_is_head(&a, &b));
Perhaps OK, but the main case here is to test an (arbitrary) member of the existing list.
> +}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists