Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:34:05 +0300
From: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] bitmap: Add bitmap_zero()/bitmap_clear() test
 cases
Message-ID: <20180110093405.zhz3smxy264kmghv@yury-thinkpad>
References: <20180109172430.87452-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180109172430.87452-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jan 2018 09:34:17.4289 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 36176954-2340-4594-78c0-08d5580d5255
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 711e4ccf-2e9b-4bcf-a551-4094005b6194
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR0701MB3828
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

Hi Andy,

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:24:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Explicitly test bitmap_zero() and bitmap_clear() functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/test_bitmap.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/test_bitmap.c b/lib/test_bitmap.c
> index de7ef2996a07..9734af711816 100644
> --- a/lib/test_bitmap.c
> +++ b/lib/test_bitmap.c
> @@ -105,6 +105,35 @@ __check_eq_u32_array(const char *srcfile, unsigned int line,
>  #define expect_eq_pbl(...)		__expect_eq(pbl, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>  #define expect_eq_u32_array(...)	__expect_eq(u32_array, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>  
> +static void __init test_zero_clear(void)
> +{
> +	DECLARE_BITMAP(bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	/* Known way to set all bits */

Nit: if you start your comments with capital, proceed that way till
the end.

> +	memset(bmap, 0xff, 128);
> +
> +	expect_eq_pbl("0-22", bmap, 23);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("0-1023", bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	/* single-word bitmaps */
> +	bitmap_clear(bmap, 0, 9);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("9-1023", bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	bitmap_zero(bmap, 35);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("64-1023", bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	/* cross boundaries operations */
> +	bitmap_clear(bmap, 79, 19);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("64-78,98-1023", bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	bitmap_zero(bmap, 115);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("128-1023", bmap, 1024);
> +
> +	/* Zeroing entire area */
> +	bitmap_zero(bmap, 1024);
> +	expect_eq_pbl("", bmap, 1024);
> +}
> +
>  static void __init test_zero_fill_copy(void)
>  {
>  	DECLARE_BITMAP(bmap1, 1024);
> @@ -309,6 +338,7 @@ static void noinline __init test_mem_optimisations(void)
>  
>  static int __init test_bitmap_init(void)
>  {
> +	test_zero_clear();
>  	test_zero_fill_copy();
>  	test_bitmap_arr32();
>  	test_bitmap_parselist();

I don't understand what patch #4 is doing in this series. At the first
glance, it may be applied separately.

The rest is looking fine. For 1-3,
Reviewed-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>