From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753245AbbJZVy3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:54:29 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]:38009 "EHLO mail-wi0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752816AbbJZVy1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:54:27 -0400 From: Rasmus Villemoes To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Cc: Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Ulf Hansson , James Bottomley , Kees Cook , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] lib/test-string_helpers.c: add string_get_size() tests Organization: D03 References: <1445867720-25473-1-git-send-email-vkuznets@redhat.com> <1445867720-25473-4-git-send-email-vkuznets@redhat.com> X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:jbottomley@odin.com::C3t8++6sgSEwLU8q:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000kO2 X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:ulf.hansson@linaro.org::i1kXdOdnR6xs9nOI:0000000000000000000000000000000000000001MVb X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:keescook@chromium.org::XF2fOQxOwly69QOi:00000000000000000000000000000000000000001QBW X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:vkuznets@redhat.com::FdczbNtAidd/yVje:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001zFA X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com::qOSjo285zc2Aa5LP:00000000000000000000000000001SXI X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org::FmKxPp237jL9CDUX:00000000000000000000000000000000040Pw X-Hashcash: 1:20:151026:akpm@linux-foundation.org::vBUKMKcr+NF9cIHG:0000000000000000000000000000000000005vwT Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 22:54:24 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1445867720-25473-4-git-send-email-vkuznets@redhat.com> (Vitaly Kuznetsov's message of "Mon, 26 Oct 2015 14:55:20 +0100") Message-ID: <87y4ep5m9b.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 26 2015, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Add a couple of simple tests for string_get_size(). > > Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov > --- > lib/test-string_helpers.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lib/test-string_helpers.c b/lib/test-string_helpers.c > index 8e376ef..a158cb3 100644 > --- a/lib/test-string_helpers.c > +++ b/lib/test-string_helpers.c > @@ -326,6 +326,47 @@ out: > kfree(out_test); > } > > +#define string_get_size_maxbuf 16 > +#define test_string_get_size_one(size, blk_size, units, exp_result) \ > + do { \ > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(exp_result) >= string_get_size_maxbuf); \ > + __test_string_get_size((size), (blk_size), (units), \ > + (exp_result)); \ > + } while (0) > + > + > +static __init void __test_string_get_size(const u64 size, const u32 blk_size, > + const enum string_size_units units, > + const char *exp_result) > +{ > + char buf[string_get_size_maxbuf]; > + > + string_get_size(size, blk_size, units, buf, sizeof(buf)); > + if (!memcmp(buf, exp_result, strlen(exp_result) + 1)) > + return; > + > + buf[sizeof(buf) - 1] = '\0'; > + pr_warn("Test 'test_string_get_size_one' failed!\n"); > + pr_warn("string_get_size(size = %llu, blk_size = %u, units = %d\n", > + size, blk_size, units); > + pr_warn("expected: '%s', got '%s'\n", exp_result, buf); > +} > + > +static __init void test_string_get_size(void) > +{ > + test_string_get_size_one(16384, 512, STRING_UNITS_2, "8.00 MiB"); > + test_string_get_size_one(500118192, 512, STRING_UNITS_2, "238 GiB"); > + test_string_get_size_one(8192, 4096, STRING_UNITS_10, "33.5 MB"); > + test_string_get_size_one(1100, 1, STRING_UNITS_10, "1.10 kB"); > + test_string_get_size_one(3000, 1900, STRING_UNITS_10, "5.70 MB"); > + test_string_get_size_one(151234561234657, 3456789, STRING_UNITS_10, > + "522 EB"); Since we're changing this anyway, can't we test every pair of (size,blk_size) with both units? That'll be twice the number of tests for less horizontal real estate. E.g. test_string_get_size_one(8192, 4096, "32.0 MiB", "33.5 MB"); Do we really care how and if string_get_size works for a non-power-of-2 blk_size? I certainly assume that we're passed a non-zero value. Rasmus