linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf test: Use TEST_FAIL in the TEST

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: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:02:07 -0800
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, 
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf test: Use TEST_FAIL in the TEST_ASSERT macros
 instead of -1

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 12:07 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Just to make things clearer, return TEST_FAIL (-1) instead of an open
> coded -1.
>
> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>

Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>

Thanks,
Ian

> ---
>  tools/perf/tests/tests.h | 16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
> index dad3d7414142d1be..3aa7701ee0e939f7 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
> @@ -4,11 +4,17 @@
>
>  #include <stdbool.h>
>
> +enum {
> +       TEST_OK   =  0,
> +       TEST_FAIL = -1,
> +       TEST_SKIP = -2,
> +};
> +
>  #define TEST_ASSERT_VAL(text, cond)                                     \
>  do {                                                                    \
>         if (!(cond)) {                                                   \
>                 pr_debug("FAILED %s:%d %s\n", __FILE__, __LINE__, text); \
> -               return -1;                                               \
> +               return TEST_FAIL;                                        \
>         }                                                                \
>  } while (0)
>
> @@ -17,16 +23,10 @@ do {                                                                         \
>         if (val != expected) {                                           \
>                 pr_debug("FAILED %s:%d %s (%d != %d)\n",                 \
>                          __FILE__, __LINE__, text, val, expected);       \
> -               return -1;                                               \
> +               return TEST_FAIL;                                                \
>         }                                                                \
>  } while (0)
>
> -enum {
> -       TEST_OK   =  0,
> -       TEST_FAIL = -1,
> -       TEST_SKIP = -2,
> -};
> -
>  struct test_suite;
>
>  typedef int (*test_fnptr)(struct test_suite *, int);
> --
> 2.43.0
>