[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202003131705.F6D0FD73@keescook>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:05:22 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, luto@...capital.net, wad@...omium.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] kselftest: add fixture parameters
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 04:52:02PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 16:31:25 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
> > > @@ -326,7 +387,8 @@
> > > } \
> > > static void fixture_name##_##test_name( \
> > > struct __test_metadata __attribute__((unused)) *_metadata, \
> > > - FIXTURE_DATA(fixture_name) __attribute__((unused)) *self)
> > > + FIXTURE_DATA(fixture_name) __attribute__((unused)) *self, \
> > > + const FIXTURE_PARAMS(fixture_name) __attribute__((unused)) *params)
> >
> > Could this be done without expanding the function arguments? (i.e. can
> > the params just stay attached to the __test_metadata, perhaps having the
> > test runner adjust a new "current_param" variable to point to the
> > current param? Having everything attached to the single __test_metadata
> > makes a lot of things easier, IMO.
>
> Sure! I felt a little awkward dereferencing _metadata in the test,
> so I followed the example of self. But I can change.
>
> Can I add a macro like CURRENT_PARAM() that would implicitly use
> _metadata?
Yeah, that seems cleaner. Thanks! This is very cool. :)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists