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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220125210011.3817742-1-dlatypov@google.com> <20220125210011.3817742-2-dlatypov@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220125210011.3817742-2-dlatypov@google.com>
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jan 2022 16:22:06 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFd5g46hoFZcKHXvfe1S5WyRX6gbj-CrtXcKjrixSyHwV+vp_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kunit: remove va_format from kunit_assert
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
Cc:     davidgow@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 4:00 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> wrote:
>
> The concern is that having a lot of redundant fields in kunit_assert can
> blow up stack usage if the compiler doesn't optimize them away [1].
>
> The comment on this field implies that it was meant to be initialized
> when the expect/assert was declared, but this only happens when we run
> kunit_do_failed_assertion().
>
> We don't need to access it outside of that function, so move it out of
> the struct and make it a local variable there.
>
> This change also takes the chance to reduce the number of macros by
> inlining the now simplified KUNIT_INIT_ASSERT_STRUCT() macro.
>
> [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>