Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros

[David Gow]

On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 8:53 PM Maíra Canal <mairacanal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Currently, in order to compare memory blocks in KUnit, the KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ or
> KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE macros are used in conjunction with the memcmp function,
> such as:
>   KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, memcmp(foo, bar, size), 0);
>
> Although this usage produces correct results for the test cases, if the
> expectation fails the error message is not very helpful, indicating only the
> return of the memcmp function.
>
> Therefore, create a new set of macros KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and
> KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ that compare memory blocks until a determined size. In
> case of expectation failure, those macros print the hex dump of the memory
> blocks, making it easier to debug test failures for memory blocks.
>
> The v4 doesn't bring many changes. The output is aligned just like the previous
> version but it fixes some mail client problems (sorry about that) and mentions
> that this macros are not recommended for structured data.
>
> The first patch of the series introduces the KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and
> KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ. The second patch adds an example of memory block
> expectations on the kunit-example-test.c. And the last patch replaces the
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ for KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ on the existing occurrences.
>
> Best Regards,
> - Maíra Canal
>
> v1 -> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/2a0dcd75-5461-5266-2749-808f638f4c50@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#m402cc72eb01fb3b88d6706cf7d1705fdd51e5da2
>
> - Change "determinated" to "specified" (Daniel Latypov).
> - Change the macro KUNIT_EXPECT_ARREQ to KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ, in order to make
> it easier for users to infer the right size unit (Daniel Latypov).
> - Mark the different bytes on the failure message with a <> (Daniel Latypov).
> - Replace a constant number of array elements for ARRAY_SIZE() (André Almeida).
> - Rename "array" and "expected" variables to "array1" and "array2" (Daniel Latypov).
>
> v2 -> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220802212621.420840-1-mairacanal@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
>
> - Make the bytes aligned at output.
> - Add KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT to the output for the indentation (Daniel Latypov).
> - Line up the trailing \ at macros using tabs (Daniel Latypov).
> - Line up the params to the functions (Daniel Latypov).
> - Change "Increament" to "Augment" (Daniel Latypov).
> - Use sizeof() for array sizes (Daniel Latypov).
> - Add Daniel Latypov's tags.
>
> v3 -> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/CABVgOSm_59Yr82deQm2C=18jjSv_akmn66zs4jxx3hfziXPeHg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
>
> - Fix wrapped lines by the mail client (David Gow).
> - Mention on documentation that KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ is not recommended for
> structured data (David Gow).
> - Add Muhammad Usama Anjum's tag.
>

Thanks very much! I've looked through and tested this, and it looks great to me.

This entire series is
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx>

Cheers,
-- David


> Maíra Canal (3):
>   kunit: Introduce KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ and KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMNEQ macros
>   kunit: Add KUnit memory block assertions to the example_all_expect_macros_test
>   kunit: Use KUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ macro
>
>  .../gpu/drm/tests/drm_format_helper_test.c    |  6 +-
>  include/kunit/assert.h                        | 34 ++++++++
>  include/kunit/test.h                          | 84 +++++++++++++++++++
>  lib/kunit/assert.c                            | 56 +++++++++++++
>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c                |  7 ++
>  net/core/dev_addr_lists_test.c                |  4 +-
>  6 files changed, 186 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.37.1
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20220808125237.277126-1-mairacanal%40riseup.net.