Before:
> Expected str == "world", but
> str == hello
> "world" == world
After:
> Expected str == "world", but
> str == "hello"
<we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
case of
KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
(If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
In that case, you'd get:
> Expected "hello" == "world", but
<output for next failure>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
---
lib/kunit/assert.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/assert.c b/lib/kunit/assert.c
index e0ec7d6fed6f..176ef547fa94 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/assert.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/assert.c
@@ -156,6 +156,22 @@ void kunit_binary_ptr_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_binary_ptr_assert_format);
+/* Checks if KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() args were string literals.
+ * Note: `text` will have ""s where as `value` will not.
+ */
+static bool is_str_literal(const char *text, const char *value)
+{
+ int len;
+
+ len = strlen(text);
+ if (len < 2)
+ return false;
+ if (text[0] != '\"' || text[len-1] != '\"')
+ return false;
+
+ return strncmp(text+1, value, len-2) == 0;
+}
+
void kunit_binary_str_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
struct string_stream *stream)
{
@@ -168,12 +184,14 @@ void kunit_binary_str_assert_format(const struct kunit_assert *assert,
binary_assert->left_text,
binary_assert->operation,
binary_assert->right_text);
- string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %s\n",
- binary_assert->left_text,
- binary_assert->left_value);
- string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == %s",
- binary_assert->right_text,
- binary_assert->right_value);
+ if (!is_str_literal(binary_assert->left_text, binary_assert->left_value))
+ string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == \"%s\"\n",
+ binary_assert->left_text,
+ binary_assert->left_value);
+ if (!is_str_literal(binary_assert->right_text, binary_assert->right_value))
+ string_stream_add(stream, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%s == \"%s\"",
+ binary_assert->right_text,
+ binary_assert->right_value);
kunit_assert_print_msg(assert, stream);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_binary_str_assert_format);
base-commit: 1e0d27fce010b0a4a9e595506b6ede75934c31be
prerequisite-patch-id: 290f8022f30763cbfb6aec969b038a6f60a57482
--
2.30.0.478.g8a0d178c01-goog
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Before:
> > Expected str == "world", but
> > str == hello
> > "world" == world
>
> After:
> > Expected str == "world", but
> > str == "hello"
> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
>
> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
> case of
> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
>
> In that case, you'd get:
> > Expected "hello" == "world", but
> <output for next failure>
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>
On 4/2/21 3:35 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Before:
>>> Expected str == "world", but
>>> str == hello
>>> "world" == world
>>
>> After:
>>> Expected str == "world", but
>>> str == "hello"
>> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
>>
>> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
>> case of
>> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
>> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
>> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
>>
>> In that case, you'd get:
>>> Expected "hello" == "world", but
>> <output for next failure>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
>
> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>
>
Hi Daniel,
Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
thanks,
-- Shuah
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:47 AM Shuah Khan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 4/2/21 3:35 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Before:
> >>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>> str == hello
> >>> "world" == world
> >>
> >> After:
> >>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>> str == "hello"
> >> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
> >>
> >> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
> >> case of
> >> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
> >> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
> >> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
> >>
> >> In that case, you'd get:
> >>> Expected "hello" == "world", but
> >> <output for next failure>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>
> >
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
>
> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
Are there some flags you'd like me to pass to checkpatch?
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --git HEAD
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked
Commit f66884e8b831 ("kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() quote values,
don't print literals") has no obvious style problems and is ready for
submission.
I just rebased onto linus/master again since I know checkpatch.pl's
default behavior had changed recently, but I didn't see any errors
there.
I know this commit made some lines go just over 80 characters, so
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --max-line-length=80 --git HEAD
...
total: 0 errors, 4 warnings, 42 lines checked
I can go and line wrap these but had figured they were more readable
this way if checkpatch.pl no longer complained by default.
Thanks,
Daniel
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
On 4/2/21 1:09 PM, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:47 AM Shuah Khan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/2/21 3:35 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Before:
>>>>> Expected str == "world", but
>>>>> str == hello
>>>>> "world" == world
>>>>
>>>> After:
>>>>> Expected str == "world", but
>>>>> str == "hello"
>>>> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
>>>>
>>>> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
>>>> case of
>>>> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
>>>> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
>>>> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
>>>>
>>>> In that case, you'd get:
>>>>> Expected "hello" == "world", but
>>>> <output for next failure>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
>> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
>>
>> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
>
> Are there some flags you'd like me to pass to checkpatch?
>
> $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --git HEAD
> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked
>
My commit script uses --strict which shows readability errors.
> Commit f66884e8b831 ("kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() quote values,
> don't print literals") has no obvious style problems and is ready for
> submission.
>
> I just rebased onto linus/master again since I know checkpatch.pl's
> default behavior had changed recently, but I didn't see any errors
> there.
>
> I know this commit made some lines go just over 80 characters, so
> $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --max-line-length=80 --git HEAD
> ...
> total: 0 errors, 4 warnings, 42 lines checked
>
Don't worry about line wrap warns. I just ignore them. :)
thanks,
-- Shuah
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 12:19 PM Shuah Khan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 4/2/21 1:09 PM, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:47 AM Shuah Khan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 4/2/21 3:35 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Before:
> >>>>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>>>> str == hello
> >>>>> "world" == world
> >>>>
> >>>> After:
> >>>>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>>>> str == "hello"
> >>>> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
> >>>>
> >>>> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
> >>>> case of
> >>>> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
> >>>> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
> >>>> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
> >>>>
> >>>> In that case, you'd get:
> >>>>> Expected "hello" == "world", but
> >>>> <output for next failure>
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
> >> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
> >>
> >> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
> >
> > Are there some flags you'd like me to pass to checkpatch?
> >
> > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --git HEAD
> > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked
> >
>
> My commit script uses --strict which shows readability errors.
Oh neat, TIL.
I'll make sure to use that in the future, thanks!
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/[email protected]/
>
> > Commit f66884e8b831 ("kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() quote values,
> > don't print literals") has no obvious style problems and is ready for
> > submission.
> >
> > I just rebased onto linus/master again since I know checkpatch.pl's
> > default behavior had changed recently, but I didn't see any errors
> > there.
> >
> > I know this commit made some lines go just over 80 characters, so
> > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --max-line-length=80 --git HEAD
> > ...
> > total: 0 errors, 4 warnings, 42 lines checked
> >
>
> Don't worry about line wrap warns. I just ignore them. :)
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
>
>