Re: [PATCH v4 02/18] kunit: test: add test resource management API

[Brendan Higgins]

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-05-14 15:16:55)
> > diff --git a/kunit/test.c b/kunit/test.c
> > index 86f65ba2bcf92..a15e6f8c41582 100644
> > --- a/kunit/test.c
> > +++ b/kunit/test.c
> [..]
> > +
> > +void *kunit_kmalloc(struct kunit *test, size_t size, gfp_t gfp)
> > +{
> > +       struct kunit_kmalloc_params params;
> > +       struct kunit_resource *res;
> > +
> > +       params.size = size;
> > +       params.gfp = gfp;
> > +
> > +       res = kunit_alloc_resource(test,
> > +                                  kunit_kmalloc_init,
> > +                                  kunit_kmalloc_free,
> > +                                  &params);
> > +
> > +       if (res)
> > +               return res->allocation;
> > +       else
> > +               return NULL;
>
> Can be written as
>
>         if (res)
>                 return ....
>         return
>
> and some static analysis tools prefer this.

Sounds reasonable, will fix in next revision.

> > +}
> > +
> > +void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test)
> > +{
> > +       struct kunit_resource *resource, *resource_safe;
> > +       unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > +       spin_lock_irqsave(&test->lock, flags);
>
> Ah ok, test->lock is protecting everything now? Does it need to be a
> spinlock, or can it be a mutex?

No it needs to be a spin lock. There are some conceivable
circumstances where the test object can be accessed by code in which
it isn't safe to sleep.

> > +       list_for_each_entry_safe(resource,
> > +                                resource_safe,
> > +                                &test->resources,
> > +                                node) {
> > +               kunit_free_resource(test, resource);
> > +       }
> > +       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&test->lock, flags);
> > +}
> > +