lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v12 11/18] kunit: test: add the concept of assertions
From
Date
Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-08-12 11:24:14)
> Add support for assertions which are like expectations except the test
> terminates if the assertion is not satisfied.
>
> The idea with assertions is that you use them to state all the
> preconditions for your test. Logically speaking, these are the premises
> of the test case, so if a premise isn't true, there is no point in
> continuing the test case because there are no conclusions that can be
> drawn without the premises. Whereas, the expectation is the thing you
> are trying to prove. It is not used universally in x-unit style test
> frameworks, but I really like it as a convention. You could still
> express the idea of a premise using the above idiom, but I think
> KUNIT_ASSERT_* states the intended idea perfectly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>

> + * Sets an expectation that the values that @left and @right evaluate to are
> + * not equal. This is semantically equivalent to
> + * KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(@test, strcmp((@left), (@right))). See KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE()
> + * for more information.
> + */
> +#define KUNIT_ASSERT_STRNEQ(test, left, right) \
> + KUNIT_BINARY_STR_NE_ASSERTION(test, \
> + KUNIT_ASSERTION, \
> + left, \
> + right)
> +
> +#define KUNIT_ASSERT_STRNEQ_MSG(test, left, right, fmt, ...) \
> + KUNIT_BINARY_STR_NE_MSG_ASSERTION(test, \
> + KUNIT_ASSERTION, \
> + left, \
> + right, \
> + fmt, \

Same question about tabbing too.

> diff --git a/kunit/test-test.c b/kunit/test-test.c
> index 88f4cdf03db2a..058f3fb37458a 100644
> --- a/kunit/test-test.c
> +++ b/kunit/test-test.c
> @@ -78,11 +78,13 @@ static int kunit_try_catch_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> struct kunit_try_catch_test_context *ctx;
>
> ctx = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ctx);

Ah ok. Question still stands if kunit_kzalloc() should just have the
assertion on failure.

> test->priv = ctx;
>
> ctx->try_catch = kunit_kmalloc(test,
> sizeof(*ctx->try_catch),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, ctx->try_catch);
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-13 06:56    [W:0.144 / U:10.180 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site