linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] memblock tests: add verbose output to memblock tests

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yr5S7Rf63GXXLnjp@bertie>
Date:   Thu, 30 Jun 2022 20:50:37 -0500
From:   Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@...il.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] memblock tests: add verbose output to memblock
 tests

On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 12:17:48PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 29.06.22 19:07, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 01:34:54PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> On 28.06.22 00:34, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> >>> Add and use functions and macros for printing verbose testing output.
> >>>
> >>> If the Memblock simulator was compiled with VERBOSE=1:
> >>> - prefix_push(): appends the given string to a prefix string that will be
> >>>   printed in test_fail() and test_pass*().
> >>>
> >>> - prefix_pop(): removes the last prefix from the prefix string.
> >>>
> >>> - prefix_reset(): clears the prefix string.
> >>>
> >>> - test_fail(): prints a message after a test fails containing the test
> >>>   number of the failing test and the prefix.
> >>>
> >>> - test_pass(): prints a message after a test passes containing its test
> >>>   number and the prefix.
> >>>
> >>> - test_print(): prints the given formatted output string.
> >>>
> >>> - test_pass_pop(): runs test_pass() followed by prefix_pop().
> >>>
> >>> - PREFIX_PUSH(): runs prefix_push(__func__).
> >>>
> >>> If the Memblock simulator was not compiled with VERBOSE=1, these
> >>> functions/macros do nothing.
> >>>
> >>> Add the assert wrapper macros ASSERT_EQ(), ASSERT_NE(), and ASSERT_LT().
> >>> If the assert condition fails, these macros call test_fail() before
> >>> executing assert().
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@...il.com>
> >>
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>>  
> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> >>> index 62d3191f7c9a..e55b2a8bf0ff 100644
> >>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> >>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
> >>> @@ -4,8 +4,12 @@
> >>>  
> >>>  #define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS			128
> >>>  #define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS		INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS
> >>> +#define PREFIXES_LEN_MAX			256
> >>> +#define DELIM					": "
> >>> +#define DELIM_LEN				strlen(DELIM)
> >>
> >> Why not simply
> >>
> >> #define PREFIXES_MAX	15
> >> static const char * __maybe_unused prefixes[PREFIXES_MAX];
> >> static int nr_prefixes;
> >>
> >> And then simply insert/clear the corresponding prefixes[] pointer and
> >> update nr_prefixes?
> >>
> >> When printing, you only have to walk prefixes from 0 ... nr_prefixes - 1
> >> and print the values.
> >>
> >> Avoids any string modifications.
> >>
> > What is nr_prefixes? Number of prefixes? Currently, the longest prefix is
> > 49 characters (alloc_try_nid_bottom_up_reserved_with_space_check), so I
> > think PREFIXES_MAX would need to be at least 52 (including the delimiter),
> > but let me know if I'm misunderstanding.
> 
> nr_prefixes would be the current number of prefixes (not the length).
> 
> You be storing pointers to strings in the constant pool, not copying the
> strings over.
> 
Okay, that makes sense. Good idea! I'll make this change.

> -- 
> Thanks,
> 
> David / dhildenb
> 
Thanks,
Rebecca