Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:d5a5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gn37csp1891882pxb; Sat, 2 Oct 2021 00:22:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXIdpiL1Zwbn7axHHWRzvNMCGK7htP4RZZz3M0PwRYId+HtkqBuVgh4YauLnB02VEzpRjd X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b18b:b0:13a:354a:3e9d with SMTP id s11-20020a170902b18b00b0013a354a3e9dmr13243306plr.36.1633159337356; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 00:22:17 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1633159337; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=DkUKZC36jDo1HUwxIpZzpgnv+BWQIaOMVPeBt2HKD/Aa+As+4E7iMwqbQapBFkbMGy 8nTD8577ebRiLX3gh1wM2yuZidhuef9h4zraNnsBYwJVORm6GHSqbUdE3eKWvP8y2Dsq X1cRBzunUrz6wiBtpuMrBe/jXBcqIiDwhdTsvqvPiqVnL3ORlSmC2fpOw2UDsnUk1kqp fO4InozvOllKsQd9ibucO8brJLJoyL81KJK2Wq9Hl/rYzKjG+4711AZP7IuRoMEyw6YX Pv8s35C8ib6M2JC2GrtvMIBgDCU8Lkjta5uqcti58qZaizIeIrGJv6/nL/4DF53BF3tZ MjBA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=3FnGZoxeDqkUXZxDHIuKWA3WY8/3b4UZNXWAVQLvHaU=; b=ElI4P0E0j16DgYtSSyJ+4lLIW73nAj0HydqH6Rd7zlfhaoXs17FlTa0FIqY2fJMw/z t8GQ3jGKIIF6iIEZjeGkF/FbR58f1sFTZbXQMOYPJjX+D1qMFhqtkDUVUvIxsXNTZEEV K+Y1t/ZRbsNxFJ/3swVyjl+wNoypfx5alm7iQW3ac/uefkxnSUExtP91Yy+RaeMXjKJV 7BFuiSMBwLz5yW/xbXwqu2OnzRXg4x+xggMLIEE5qIUUJRCPO5yk6arht22cZoNT2QI9 2DAwxv0OOVRwur1SraGrit4NLND6Ba1/2/+plq1QQiXMIzpw4EIEvp6wjmnmC19w1bgz dqzA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=mQ1RQo+1; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j187si2889631pge.354.2021.10.02.00.22.04; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 00:22:17 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=mQ1RQo+1; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232355AbhJBHWM (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 2 Oct 2021 03:22:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55738 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232507AbhJBHWM (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Oct 2021 03:22:12 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B83DFC0613E8 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2021 00:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id a131-20020a1c7f89000000b0030d4c90fa87so3053461wmd.2 for ; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 00:20:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3FnGZoxeDqkUXZxDHIuKWA3WY8/3b4UZNXWAVQLvHaU=; b=mQ1RQo+1hJqiCB4hNcMrnvesT/bvrEbIBGsDvIud4xTJ+zIA0qj9hAYx3z22O24DT1 M3Aicm75v5Ui80tx1LSG6gdBXkuWEyPv82Sr6oWlsKBT+sfFguCJLhbjYKtLBrPgpv2z dEvNMFz3myDZo/sDzq/Xqr/sK311NhjZq38O7hsgoPoqsPcQbHFpanBi106FUR2f1bwB gd5/CFIWSu255BXLxAXHcrSlhMv83l1GKVD4Otyo/zkZExMQAuP8gj+lGIeuywa60fl2 B1qmpM40b9SrtLTLho0oW9qc0eqaZkRsoFGQYiJGLyxM7fhxAq2uuiSHVgVddov/lT7O udig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3FnGZoxeDqkUXZxDHIuKWA3WY8/3b4UZNXWAVQLvHaU=; b=lU27z8zPvWxt7KZ650a0r63Ab7uKKu+Oukc9rL8xVPtgUdRkmkolADTt67I00sTz6N 0M/oecsSckKtBSEft4cIZ9CfLd6f96zRajYYZRtGdwt5o6bLMMt4vSJGyqBCxRuH38cp Kxhm8sOf7QAolQxpRnoLtebWilvU1zhsP2hJJJCWHKsSCLeiVdEIqex5IMODEy9BBzwy wlywsoxdWHVcG6ulN7yjSbW2cO5yUXlipXuBmeINoYuyFY5ZOqdh1LrTBGDb3iasRqbg DkALdTwqy1Ox4K81pl4sqdxPiOoAYB0nmEM7V1pyI8U69Zi53b5riVizekmx0q4BBsrz FNNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5333QDcZcjwyUtM0c4154Iw9+dy4zwkc3u5lXLl30m6yquf1rkpZ kDKrQZSR86SqdtOoah6x58d5DHJPgSg9aH+HOpMBJw== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c453:: with SMTP id l19mr8062506wmi.7.1633159225169; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 00:20:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210926223322.848641-1-isabellabdoamaral@usp.br> <20210926223322.848641-3-isabellabdoamaral@usp.br> In-Reply-To: <20210926223322.848641-3-isabellabdoamaral@usp.br> From: David Gow Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2021 15:20:14 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] test_hash.c: split test_int_hash into arch-specific functions To: Isabella Basso Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , ferreiraenzoa@gmail.com, augusto.duraes33@gmail.com, Brendan Higgins , Daniel Latypov , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , KUnit Development , ~lkcamp/patches@lists.sr.ht, rodrigosiqueiramelo@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 6:33 AM Isabella Basso wrote: > > Split the test_int_hash function to keep its mainloop separate from > arch-specific chunks, which are only compiled as needed. This aims at > improving readability. > > Tested-by: David Gow > Signed-off-by: Isabella Basso > --- This looks good to me. It's possibly worth fixing up the changelog mixup between this and patch 3 if you send out a v3. A minor suggestion re: commenting below, otherwise this is: Reviewed-by: David Gow -- David > lib/test_hash.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/test_hash.c b/lib/test_hash.c > index d4b0cfdb0377..08fe63776c4f 100644 > --- a/lib/test_hash.c > +++ b/lib/test_hash.c > @@ -56,6 +56,53 @@ fill_buf(char *buf, size_t len, u32 seed) > } > } > > +/* Holds most testing variables for the int test */ It might be worth commenting what these variables actually are here, as it's pretty confusing on a quick read through. Maybe something like: > +struct test_hash_params { > + unsigned long long *h64; /* Pointer to integer to be hashed. */ > + u32 h0; /* Low 32-bits of integer to be hashed. */ > + u32 h1; /* Arch-specific hash result. */ > + u32 h2; /* Generic hash result. */ > + u32 (*hash_or)[33]; /* ORed hashes of given size (in bits) */ > +}; > + > +#ifdef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 > +static bool __init > +test_int__hash_32(struct test_hash_params *params) > +{ > + params->hash_or[1][0] |= params->h2 = __hash_32_generic(params->h0); > +#if HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 == 1 > + if (params->h1 != params->h2) { > + pr_err("__hash_32(%#x) = %#x != __hash_32_generic() = %#x", > + params->h0, params->h1, params->h2); > + return false; > + } > +#endif > + return true; > +} > +#endif > + > +#ifdef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 > +static bool __init > +test_int_hash_64(struct test_hash_params *params, u32 const *m, int *k) > +{ > + params->h2 = hash_64_generic(*params->h64, *k); > +#if HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 == 1 > + if (params->h1 != params->h2) { > + pr_err("hash_64(%#llx, %d) = %#x != hash_64_generic() = %#x", > + *params->h64, *k, params->h1, params->h2); > + return false; > + } > +#else > + if (params->h2 > *m) { > + pr_err("hash_64_generic(%#llx, %d) = %#x > %#x", > + *params->h64, *k, params->h1, *m); > + return false; > + } > +#endif > + return true; > +} > +#endif > + > /* > * Test the various integer hash functions. h64 (or its low-order bits) > * is the integer to hash. hash_or accumulates the OR of the hash values, > @@ -69,19 +116,13 @@ static bool __init > test_int_hash(unsigned long long h64, u32 hash_or[2][33]) > { > int k; > - u32 h0 = (u32)h64, h1, h2; > + struct test_hash_params params = { &h64, (u32)h64, 0, 0, hash_or }; > > /* Test __hash32 */ > - hash_or[0][0] |= h1 = __hash_32(h0); > + hash_or[0][0] |= params.h1 = __hash_32(params.h0); > #ifdef HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 > - hash_or[1][0] |= h2 = __hash_32_generic(h0); > -#if HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 == 1 > - if (h1 != h2) { > - pr_err("__hash_32(%#x) = %#x != __hash_32_generic() = %#x", > - h0, h1, h2); > + if (!test_int__hash_32(¶ms)) > return false; > - } > -#endif > #endif > > /* Test k = 1..32 bits */ > @@ -89,37 +130,24 @@ test_int_hash(unsigned long long h64, u32 hash_or[2][33]) > u32 const m = ((u32)2 << (k-1)) - 1; /* Low k bits set */ > > /* Test hash_32 */ > - hash_or[0][k] |= h1 = hash_32(h0, k); > - if (h1 > m) { > - pr_err("hash_32(%#x, %d) = %#x > %#x", h0, k, h1, m); > + hash_or[0][k] |= params.h1 = hash_32(params.h0, k); > + if (params.h1 > m) { > + pr_err("hash_32(%#x, %d) = %#x > %#x", params.h0, k, params.h1, m); > return false; > } > > /* Test hash_64 */ > - hash_or[1][k] |= h1 = hash_64(h64, k); > - if (h1 > m) { > - pr_err("hash_64(%#llx, %d) = %#x > %#x", h64, k, h1, m); > + hash_or[1][k] |= params.h1 = hash_64(h64, k); > + if (params.h1 > m) { > + pr_err("hash_64(%#llx, %d) = %#x > %#x", h64, k, params.h1, m); > return false; > } > #ifdef HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 > - h2 = hash_64_generic(h64, k); > -#if HAVE_ARCH_HASH_64 == 1 > - if (h1 != h2) { > - pr_err("hash_64(%#llx, %d) = %#x != hash_64_generic() " > - "= %#x", h64, k, h1, h2); > + if (!test_int_hash_64(¶ms, &m, &k)) > return false; > - } > -#else > - if (h2 > m) { > - pr_err("hash_64_generic(%#llx, %d) = %#x > %#x", > - h64, k, h1, m); > - return false; > - } > -#endif > #endif > } > > - (void)h2; /* Suppress unused variable warning */ > return true; > } > > -- > 2.33.0 >