linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/2] kselftest: Add mechanism for reporting a KSFT

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]

Message-Id: <20240306-kselftest-tty-tname-v1-1-33505b31629e@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2024 19:21:25 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, 
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
 Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc: Michal Sekletar <msekleta@...hat.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] kselftest: Add mechanism for reporting a KSFT_ result
 code

Currently there's no helper which a test can use to report it's result as
a KSFT_ result code, we can report a boolean pass/fail but not a skip. This
is sometimes a useful idiom so let's add a helper ksft_test_result_report()
which translates into the relevant report types.

Due to the use of va_args in the result reporting functions this is done as
a macro rather than an inline function as one might expect, none of the
alternatives looked particularly great.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
index a781e6311810..9bc130c269d7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
  * and finally report the pass/fail/skip/xfail state of the test with one of:
  *
  *     ksft_test_result(condition, fmt, ...);
+ *     ksft_test_result_report(result, fmt, ...);
  *     ksft_test_result_pass(fmt, ...);
  *     ksft_test_result_fail(fmt, ...);
  *     ksft_test_result_skip(fmt, ...);
@@ -254,6 +255,27 @@ static inline __printf(1, 2) void ksft_test_result_error(const char *msg, ...)
 	va_end(args);
 }
 
+/**
+ * ksft_test_result() - Report test success based on truth of condition
+ *
+ * @condition: if true, report test success, otherwise failure.
+ */
+#define ksft_test_result_report(result, fmt, ...) do {		\
+	switch (result) {					\
+	case KSFT_PASS:						\
+		ksft_test_result_pass(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);	\
+		break;						\
+	case KSFT_FAIL:						\
+		ksft_test_result_fail(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);	\
+		break;						\
+	case KSFT_XFAIL:					\
+		ksft_test_result_xfail(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);	\
+		break;						\
+	case KSFT_SKIP:						\
+		ksft_test_result_skip(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);	\
+		break;						\
+	} } while (0)
+
 static inline int ksft_exit_pass(void)
 {
 	ksft_print_cnts();

-- 
2.30.2