linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] lib: add basic KUnit test for lib/math

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, 16 May 2024 13:26:30 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@...com>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
	davidgow@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
	Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] lib: add basic KUnit test for lib/math

On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 03:49:44PM +0530, Devarsh Thakkar wrote:
> Hi Daniel, Andy,
> 
> On 16/04/21 23:34, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> > Add basic test coverage for files that don't require any config options:
> > * part of math.h (what seem to be the most commonly used macros)
> > * gcd.c
> > * lcm.c
> > * int_sqrt.c
> > * reciprocal_div.c
> > (Ignored int_pow.c since it's a simple textbook algorithm.)
> > 
> > These tests aren't particularly interesting, but they
> > * provide short and simple examples of parameterized tests
> > * provide a place to add tests for any new files in this dir
> > * are written so adding new test cases to cover edge cases should be easy
> >   * looking at code coverage, we hit all the branches in the .c files
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
> > Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> 
> Just checking if something else was pending on this patch-set for this not
> getting merged?
> 
> I needed this patch-set for adding tests for new macros I am adding in math.h
> as suggested in this thread [1], so wanted to pull this in my series and add
> changes on top of that for new macros.
> 
> Kindly let me know your thoughts on this.

Wow, blast from the past!
But good finding, it would be good to have more math.h related test cases.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko