Received: by 2002:a05:6358:16cc:b0:ea:6187:17c9 with SMTP id r12csp7243681rwl; Mon, 9 Jan 2023 20:49:23 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXsff4Ug7Ed9xcWh6kpStLJFvJGYNKxCLucZH1hoOqYqVsr50UdDvakxwyT6G9+WT96xkpUo X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:9d0e:b0:7c0:c10e:1395 with SMTP id kt14-20020a1709079d0e00b007c0c10e1395mr58442041ejc.1.1673326162841; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 20:49:22 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1673326162; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Oxyer36I/TUGMUVoRfx97MXKjHztZZSsjt3hWnUWuqxA5SZPBTuVnLTH0JSIyqSEYI upcl4FVuFEUkoI1thk/sZDHqzRFu0+SZHh2BaNvQ3ZH77GcttiNUdP89x0HGY3kHYPLV 3Nt0OMf7GLEjbonSPDufq1z/IuzzRVQBR17leIYCmvxyC6wPfoCkuvrioQYJAUA9bIqw XyUtP93qVFMf/YDVm5Tj/Yard1zmcExce4081Zg5ebz0jTnEAFaf4OTEtLRgufAUrte5 /LJHvkRwQm3u/CNOTt8DBJO918D0/7SFjnwq13VvWwURNBg0HJIOaBo2Pow2qdvvN3Hj MQ6Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject :message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :dkim-signature; bh=I8QTCt9yyEzrP6aQZDscqKMtl+hQBPNhmxvh+D4MRoU=; b=nd1hkUxHwAmnRysuTdq/eTUWWRsKNMNsq+7KvQOTMswWRAx/tN3UKuxQQPmJgiXZds GtrGX2avExGHUbhDeAE7c8P/KObUHQwtyrthN6isp8f59U+MSuSLyOOw8mq4S+GlCNRY Qi9vWEhkgNE5TFR7JvV2hcP26cAWmTUZaG+sAscwZlND4AZgNk+71r9soF2UoEIIz9y/ HFHv28Quir0rSTiG/nseC3v5vnB4b+8O5IcDfPeUhUYbgar+aavYl7rpH08nFYLZb7oO hN6gpqSpPBNdSiEL1ujPV7n4bJ2PvmOq5neJvfrRPJ8mznG6Usyt/l86yaC5kUMXbPRG oq0g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b="EJ/sv63q"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 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 out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id hw20-20020a170907a0d400b0084cbf5552b3si8247092ejc.970.2023.01.09.20.49.10; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 20:49:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b="EJ/sv63q"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 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 S229847AbjAJEYM (ORCPT + 53 others); Mon, 9 Jan 2023 23:24:12 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34900 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229743AbjAJEYJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2023 23:24:09 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-xe36.google.com (mail-vs1-xe36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e36]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7428740C11 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 2023 20:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe36.google.com with SMTP id m2so11020536vsv.9 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 20:24:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=I8QTCt9yyEzrP6aQZDscqKMtl+hQBPNhmxvh+D4MRoU=; b=EJ/sv63qnIcnduXb2hn+L1aNiqUCqPnJ4e+HaYtldnzu0qjUUCfowQsCoBhPLJQ7vF Gew1U8FO66t9B2aDaf3F1TDZx2Xkeut0pDCz8ibHAnj/vmRz55I/uVHquBS0LDUHa3Qz ehCO7JjH51q41xm99Xio946fkVojPFXJ7hpwHz6dvH81DGdKyJyXUhvz4rpcVOmraH+i ikfidOmzEr4XZSGcn38sHkUR1MOUgO3zIT3Tolqvt2dUSoTji7QRvP23eRPcKmBL6gNF CTMjCuyd9BIm2Keb2/xl0xu2WrDqiIrCnp1o2SUTe4XaFVRFTEc7PAWzscNTx9nsvXJz sGkQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=I8QTCt9yyEzrP6aQZDscqKMtl+hQBPNhmxvh+D4MRoU=; b=M1Dsdzq61K+87eBOzhq7aS10dD4KBJmxorlsqtArDXG6nOoNf04DccrF/ySIWzOOUy RgAWBFLWhJcXlVogvxNUEl1T9nQdKA5Yc79AYUJjZ078w2yFYHYGpYMrnUcwspplbUyY G/RFwWVBGiBzsYFSl6hqYwVySoOUGoeZJIYhgWIMogTsuUl0uM64n3v9AGxdDAMwzQbt 6UPumHE00T4LRABe1Kith1EJyrEM2wy2NXANkxniDGI+lDpb8b0yrJ60LwnJOQqMjk9M xx9RponoNDwTW4ArHgonuKYfTs/8rYGrNoz3YMdNtkkX6bshIcpGMrsFb0fYBGP2KkTp LLnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpfpRK1ZtntosyQThxCs53bHzIUOD8KRQHWpRSH9qSVSA9CoSBN EymuPri/udfCif6CVL36I5Dqzq+Mi3hpB4xAMI2/ZA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:94e:b0:3b5:1de3:19fa with SMTP id a14-20020a056102094e00b003b51de319famr8010763vsi.35.1673324646358; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 20:24:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221220031023.197178-1-rmoar@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20221220031023.197178-1-rmoar@google.com> From: David Gow Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 12:23:54 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] lib/hashtable_test.c: add test for the hashtable structure To: Rae Moar Cc: brendanhiggins@google.com, dlatypov@google.com, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 at 11:16, Rae Moar wrote: > > Add a KUnit test for the kernel hashtable implementation in > include/linux/hashtable.h. > > Note that this version does not yet test each of the rcu > alternative versions of functions. > > Signed-off-by: Rae Moar > --- Thanks for completing the triangle (hash, list, hashtable) of hashtable-related tests! This looks good to me, save for some nitpicks below. They're mostly pretty similar to Daniel's comments, so should be pretty straightforward. Cheers, -- David > > Note: The check patch script is outputting open brace errors on lines > 154, 186, 231 of lib/hashtable_test.c but I believe the format of the > braces on those lines is consistent with the Linux Kernel style guide. > Will continue to look at these errors. This is a problem we hit with the list test as well: because these functions have for_each in their name, checkpatch.pl assumes they're loops (using the macro), not functions. As with the list test, we _could_ try to fix this in checkpatch, or rename the tests, but I suspect it's a special enough case (naming a function after a macro), that it's best to ignore the warnings, keeping a note like this in the patch email. Maybe one day, checkpatch.pl will be able to tell that this is a function..= . > > lib/Kconfig.debug | 13 ++ > lib/Makefile | 1 + > lib/hashtable_test.c | 299 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 313 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 lib/hashtable_test.c > > diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug > index 3fc7abffc7aa..3cf3b6f8cff4 100644 > --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug > +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug > @@ -2458,6 +2458,19 @@ config LIST_KUNIT_TEST > > If unsure, say N. > > +config HASHTABLE_KUNIT_TEST > + tristate "KUnit Test for Kernel Hashtable structures" if !KUNIT_A= LL_TESTS > + depends on KUNIT > + default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS > + help > + This builds the hashtable KUnit test suite. > + It tests the API and basic functionality of the functions > + and associated macros defined in include/linux/hashtable.h. > + For more information on KUnit and unit tests in general please = refer > + to the KUnit documentation in Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/. > + > + If unsure, say N. > + > config LINEAR_RANGES_TEST > tristate "KUnit test for linear_ranges" > depends on KUNIT > diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile > index 161d6a724ff7..9036d3aeee0a 100644 > --- a/lib/Makefile > +++ b/lib/Makefile > @@ -370,6 +370,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PLDMFW) +=3D pldmfw/ > CFLAGS_bitfield_kunit.o :=3D $(DISABLE_STRUCTLEAK_PLUGIN) > obj-$(CONFIG_BITFIELD_KUNIT) +=3D bitfield_kunit.o > obj-$(CONFIG_LIST_KUNIT_TEST) +=3D list-test.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_HASHTABLE_KUNIT_TEST) +=3D hashtable_test.o > obj-$(CONFIG_LINEAR_RANGES_TEST) +=3D test_linear_ranges.o > obj-$(CONFIG_BITS_TEST) +=3D test_bits.o > obj-$(CONFIG_CMDLINE_KUNIT_TEST) +=3D cmdline_kunit.o > diff --git a/lib/hashtable_test.c b/lib/hashtable_test.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..7907df66a8e7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/lib/hashtable_test.c > @@ -0,0 +1,299 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +/* > + * KUnit test for the Kernel Hashtable structures. > + * > + * Copyright (C) 2022, Google LLC. > + * Author: Rae Moar > + */ > +#include > + > +#include > + > +struct hashtable_test_entry { > + int key; > + int data; > + struct hlist_node node; > + int visited; > +}; > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_init(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + /* Test the different ways of initialising a hashtable. */ > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash1, 3); > + DECLARE_HASHTABLE(hash2, 3); > + > + hash_init(hash1); > + hash_init(hash2); > + > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_empty(hash1)); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_empty(hash2)); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_empty(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry a; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + hash_init(hash); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_empty(hash)); > + > + a.key =3D 1; > + a.data =3D 13; > + hash_add(hash, &a.node, a.key); > + > + /* Hashtable should no longer be empty. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, hash_empty(hash)); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_hashed(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry a, b; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + hash_init(hash); > + a.key =3D 1; > + a.data =3D 13; > + b.key =3D 1; > + b.data =3D 2; > + > + hash_add(hash, &a.node, a.key); > + hash_add(hash, &b.node, b.key); > + > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_hashed(&a.node)); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_hashed(&b.node)); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_add(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry a, b, *x; > + int bkt; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + hash_init(hash); > + a.key =3D 1; > + a.data =3D 13; > + a.visited =3D 0; > + b.key =3D 2; > + b.data =3D 10; > + b.visited =3D 0; > + > + hash_add(hash, &a.node, a.key); > + hash_add(hash, &b.node, b.key); > + > + hash_for_each(hash, bkt, x, node) { > + if (x->key =3D=3D a.key && x->data =3D=3D a.data) > + a.visited +=3D 1; > + if (x->key =3D=3D b.key && x->data =3D=3D b.data) > + b.visited +=3D 1; I think we could improve this by checking 'x->key' is one of {a,b}. Daniel's suggestions below are good, otherwise perhaps something like: x->visited++; if (x->key =3D=3D a.key) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(x->data, a.data); else if (x->key =3D=3D b.key) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(x->data, b.data); else KUNIT_EXPECT_NEQ(x->key, x->key); /* Not an expected key. */ The other, more over-the-top option would be to have an array of struct hashtable_test_entry, rather than separate a and b variables, and to loop over them, e.g. x->visited++; for (int i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(entries); ++i) { if (entires[i]->key =3D=3D x->key) { =E2=80=A6 break; } KUNIT_EXPECT_NEQ_MSG(x->key, x->key, "Unexxpected element in hashtab= le"); } But I suspect the first is actually cleaner. > + } > + > + /* Both entries should have been visited exactly once. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, a.visited, 1); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, b.visited, 1); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_del(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry a, b, *x; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + hash_init(hash); > + a.key =3D 1; > + a.data =3D 13; > + b.key =3D 2; > + b.data =3D 10; > + b.visited =3D 0; > + > + hash_add(hash, &a.node, a.key); > + hash_add(hash, &b.node, b.key); > + > + hash_del(&b.node); > + hash_for_each_possible(hash, x, node, b.key) { > + if (x->key =3D=3D b.key && x->data =3D=3D b.data) > + b.visited +=3D 1; Again, just increment x->visited here, and possibly add KUNIT_EXPECT_NEQ(x->key, b.key). > + } > + > + /* The deleted entry should not have been visited. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, b.visited, 0); > + > + hash_del(&a.node); > + > + /* The hashtable should be empty. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, hash_empty(hash)); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_for_each(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry entries[3]; > + struct hashtable_test_entry *x; > + int bkt, i, j, count; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + /* Initialize a hashtable with three entries. */ > + hash_init(hash); > + for (i =3D 0; i < 3; i++) { > + entries[i].key =3D i; > + entries[i].data =3D i + 10; > + entries[i].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[i].node, entries[i].key); > + } > + > + count =3D 0; > + hash_for_each(hash, bkt, x, node) { > + if (x->key >=3D 0 && x->key < 3) > + entries[x->key].visited +=3D 1; Again, let's just increment x->visited, and maybe KUNIT_EXPECT_GEQ(x->key, 0), ..._LEQ(x->key, 3). > + count++; > + } > + > + /* Should have visited each entry exactly once. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3); > + for (j =3D 0; j < 3; j++) > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[j].visited, 1); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_for_each_safe(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry entries[3]; > + struct hashtable_test_entry *x; > + struct hlist_node *tmp; > + int bkt, i, j, count; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + /* Initialize a hashtable with three entries. */ > + hash_init(hash); > + for (i =3D 0; i < 3; i++) { > + entries[i].key =3D i; > + entries[i].data =3D i + 10; > + entries[i].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[i].node, entries[i].key); > + } > + > + count =3D 0; > + hash_for_each_safe(hash, bkt, tmp, x, node) { > + if (x->key >=3D 0 && x->key < 3) { > + entries[x->key].visited +=3D 1; > + hash_del(&entries[x->key].node); > + } > + count++; > + } > + > + /* Should have visited each entry exactly once. */ > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3); > + for (j =3D 0; j < 3; j++) > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[j].visited, 1); > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_for_each_possible(struct kunit *test) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry entries[4]; > + struct hashtable_test_entry *x; > + int i, j, count; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + /* Initialize a hashtable with three entries with key =3D 1. */ > + hash_init(hash); > + for (i =3D 0; i < 3; i++) { > + entries[i].key =3D 1; > + entries[i].data =3D i; > + entries[i].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[i].node, entries[i].key); > + } > + > + /* Add an entry with key =3D 2. */ > + entries[3].key =3D 2; > + entries[3].data =3D 3; > + entries[3].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[3].node, entries[3].key); > + > + count =3D 0; > + hash_for_each_possible(hash, x, node, 1) { > + if (x->data >=3D 0 && x->data < 4) > + entries[x->data].visited +=3D 1; > + count++; > + } > + > + /* Should have visited each entry with key =3D 1 exactly once. */ > + for (j =3D 0; j < 3; j++) > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[j].visited, 1); > + > + /* If entry with key =3D 2 is in the same bucket as the entries w= ith > + * key =3D 1, check it was visited. Otherwise ensure that only th= ree > + * entries were visited. > + */ > + if (hash_min(1, HASH_BITS(hash)) =3D=3D hash_min(2, HASH_BITS(has= h))) { > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 4); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[3].visited, 1); > + } else { > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3); > + } I'm a bit on-the-fence about whether or not this is too implementation-specific. I think the way the hashtable works here is supposed to be stable, but given that almost nothing in the actual kernel seems to rely on hash_min directly, maybe it's better to not lock it in with a test. How about reducing this to a KUNIT_EXPECT_GEQ(test, count, 4)? > +} > + > +static void hashtable_test_hash_for_each_possible_safe(struct kunit *tes= t) > +{ > + struct hashtable_test_entry entries[4]; > + struct hashtable_test_entry *x; > + struct hlist_node *tmp; > + int i, j, count; > + DEFINE_HASHTABLE(hash, 3); > + > + /* Initialize a hashtable with three entries with key =3D 1. */ > + hash_init(hash); > + for (i =3D 0; i < 3; i++) { > + entries[i].key =3D 1; > + entries[i].data =3D i; > + entries[i].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[i].node, entries[i].key); > + } > + > + /* Add an entry with key =3D 2. */ > + entries[3].key =3D 2; > + entries[3].data =3D 3; > + entries[3].visited =3D 0; > + hash_add(hash, &entries[3].node, entries[3].key); > + > + count =3D 0; > + hash_for_each_possible_safe(hash, x, tmp, node, 1) { > + if (x->data >=3D 0 && x->data < 4) { > + entries[x->data].visited +=3D 1; > + hash_del(&entries[x->data].node); > + } > + count++; > + } > + > + /* Should have visited each entry with key =3D 1 exactly once. */ > + for (j =3D 0; j < 3; j++) > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[j].visited, 1); > + > + /* If entry with key =3D 2 is in the same bucket as the entries w= ith > + * key =3D 1, check it was visited. Otherwise ensure that only th= ree > + * entries were visited. > + */ > + if (hash_min(1, HASH_BITS(hash)) =3D=3D hash_min(2, HASH_BITS(has= h))) { > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 4); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, entries[3].visited, 1); > + } else { > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3); > + } > +} > + > +static struct kunit_case hashtable_test_cases[] =3D { > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_init), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_empty), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_hashed), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_add), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_del), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_for_each), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_for_each_safe), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_for_each_possible), > + KUNIT_CASE(hashtable_test_hash_for_each_possible_safe), > + {}, > +}; > + > +static struct kunit_suite hashtable_test_module =3D { > + .name =3D "hashtable", > + .test_cases =3D hashtable_test_cases, > +}; > + > +kunit_test_suites(&hashtable_test_module); > + > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); > > base-commit: 054be257f28ca8eeb8e3620766501b81ceb4b293 > -- > 2.39.0.314.g84b9a713c41-goog >