linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] kunit: Rename KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE to KUNIT

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: <20240711194839.116575-1-ericchancf@google.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 19:48:39 +0000
From: Eric Chan <ericchancf@...gle.com>
To: davidgow@...gle.com
Cc: brendan.higgins@...ux.dev, ericchancf@...gle.com, 
	kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, rmoar@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] kunit: Rename KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE to KUNIT_ASSERT
 for readability

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 11:49 AM David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 at 01:06, Eric Chan <ericchancf@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Both KUNIT_FAIL and KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE defined to KUNIT_FAIL_ASSERTION
> > with different tpye of kunit_assert_type. The current naming of
> > KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE and KUNIT_FAIL_ASSERTION is confusing due to their
> > similarities. To improve readability and symmetry, renames
> > KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE to KUNIT_ASSERT. Makes the naming consistent,
> > with KUNIT_FAIL and KUNIT_ASSERT being symmetrical.
> > Additionally, an explanation for KUNIT_ASSERT has been added to clarify
> > its usage.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Chan <ericchancf@...gle.com>
> > ---
>
> I personally am not a fan of KUNIT_ASSERT() as a name here: to me it
> implies that we're checking a boolean (like KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE()).
>
> Does making this 'KUNIT_FAIL_AND_EXIT()' / 'KUNIT_FAIL_AND_ABORT()' or
> similar seem clearer to you?
>
> (Or possibly we could make this KUNIT_FAIL(), and make the existing
> KUNIT_FAIL() become KUNIT_MARK_FAILED(), though I think it's not worth
> the churn personally.)
>
> -- David

Hi David, 

Thank you very much for patiently reviewing.
I understand your suggestion, indeed KUNIT_ASSERT will be misunderstood as still an assert behavior.
But in fact, this macro has one extra abort behavior than KUNIT_FAIL.
I think KUNIT_FAIL_AND_ABORT is a pretty good name to understand itself.

I've updated patch v2 at [0].
Thanks for the reviewing and suggestions.

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240711193729.108720-1-ericchancf@google.com/

Sincerely,
  Eric Chan

>
>
>
>
> >  drivers/input/tests/input_test.c |  2 +-
> >  include/kunit/assert.h           |  2 +-
> >  include/kunit/test.h             | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/input/tests/input_test.c b/drivers/input/tests/input_test.c
> > index 2fa5b725ae0a..cbab24a265fa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/input/tests/input_test.c
> > +++ b/drivers/input/tests/input_test.c
> > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ static int input_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> >         ret = input_register_device(input_dev);
> >         if (ret) {
> >                 input_free_device(input_dev);
> > -               KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE(test, "Register device failed: %d", ret);
> > +               KUNIT_ASSERT(test, "Register device failed: %d", ret);
> >         }
> >
> >         test->priv = input_dev;
> > diff --git a/include/kunit/assert.h b/include/kunit/assert.h
> > index 24c2b9fa61e8..02c6f7bb1d26 100644
> > --- a/include/kunit/assert.h
> > +++ b/include/kunit/assert.h
> > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ void kunit_assert_prologue(const struct kunit_loc *loc,
> >   * struct kunit_fail_assert - Represents a plain fail expectation/assertion.
> >   * @assert: The parent of this type.
> >   *
> > - * Represents a simple KUNIT_FAIL/KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE that always fails.
> > + * Represents a simple KUNIT_FAIL/KUNIT_ASSERT that always fails.
> >   */
> >  struct kunit_fail_assert {
> >         struct kunit_assert assert;
> > diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
> > index 87a232421089..d1b085fd5dc3 100644
> > --- a/include/kunit/test.h
> > +++ b/include/kunit/test.h
> > @@ -1193,7 +1193,18 @@ do {                                                                            \
> >                                                 fmt,                           \
> >                                                 ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >
> > -#define KUNIT_ASSERT_FAILURE(test, fmt, ...) \
> > +/**
> > + * KUNIT_ASSERT() - Always causes a test to assert when evaluated.
> > + * @test: The test context object.
> > + * @fmt: an informational message to be printed when the assertion is made.
> > + * @...: string format arguments.
> > + *
> > + * The opposite of KUNIT_SUCCEED(), it is an assertion that always fails. In
> > + * other words, it always results in a failed assertion, and consequently
> > + * always causes the test case to assert when evaluated. See KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE()
> > + * for more information.
> > + */
> > +#define KUNIT_ASSERT(test, fmt, ...) \
> >         KUNIT_FAIL_ASSERTION(test, KUNIT_ASSERTION, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> >
> >  /**
> > --
> > 2.45.2.803.g4e1b14247a-goog
> >