Received: by 2002:a5b:505:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o5csp1736680ybp; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:41:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwBAeX3dN1gMkWMXxog41hSQVorchuurMOVNU2zC3IjZadj+r27ize+/TOvaml8rMCsUca/ X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c301:: with SMTP id l1mr5850525edq.281.1570675299902; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:41:39 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570675299; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=D+wPRi4zH1uWu37kKC8J9aeoqA4auu3NOy+kqQRC1U5uJowW9htR8kgjFjz+z55tlD vOsQmp9ILfakhFrDFMS7BET07hpPZaSoycAoO8nq8UF8DDgtwGJDCOCvgZVPlTf747CI +AkKZ4n5Wow8RgBhNMJvc/0aPuJkps3UYZGFtzTIpbhUB4gmQ2im7yaCPi8YryCGDaaz RYv04jj3FBW1/k18EqJcxUe3T1Xjy7kTBH0e4k0tCtY5KcZhW4s1udQnWXkRAjPlR3wn JB0JeZ3XMlt2fyA3Cj8cRNTFpVKW/C1hbc8Mv3O/X+ue/Z5VJ3fVtxNdRekliGkxxXPV gV8w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=zVPSsi0ckWW+NDOnThRgNCDXsF2fYgxmHf0H/s3WIvA=; b=nmzgeAF8SyFtFv1DtYMymyZ5WebKru9pmycgRYl8YafqZc9t77IfT2ROKeaf0t/kXo hmJw0g7ty6TKZyNKcylVa7Z2qyUPMJT68iZCxQIll0lQ7YBV76yUuXzSsB3YV3n1BMCS FV+acz2dqId3xj7nlShIwaBrL9KqiPUAMKFG+EMtYpbEpIjEi82KovG3fkdtM85GzA1C x9dnCuV6lPQ2FGwRsZgtbKC/UoJY7Voe0YYSqCxO4ijte3lF81vRAMFutsld5rXsI1kS GlvKqRy66P0X9ImgrYuoRZ9NpoDK2DhxjyL54hMUna5l3wutfp2mSZ8D08LJCU5crvoE yc0w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=aKELP07R; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-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. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z6si2214432edx.139.2019.10.09.19.41.15; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=aKELP07R; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-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 S1732447AbfJJClK (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 22:41:10 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com ([209.85.160.194]:39776 "EHLO mail-qt1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726435AbfJJClK (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 22:41:10 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id n7so6523488qtb.6 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:41:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zVPSsi0ckWW+NDOnThRgNCDXsF2fYgxmHf0H/s3WIvA=; b=aKELP07R9q1Id5ugidCVpqzCTS3FYY6U96yYoQ3rp55UOQyhxZeHg/ZLrxQguX3NMQ HW3R5A0xPbONmhHSwdmZFM+6rFLeytPcYBZKPRGw6yEm9XlEP6jpVskGrYB1Q6Bbt14U pX7faVjssW8MoE/2QmoIBF3Zb4eT+MB0GbQM2eLKZ8mUPpa8qbwdy/bFvJY0J5Ur15jX 1uHG8piU87wdsznMmQvH19P2dCZAKI+bif0g71T1Ylz3Yc1j0vn5fTTqR6WiZDo2J2RR AV4eAz8E9IeCtC1CRHENKdVFvqxxJvT1jU8jkaOyzJoGcDFmiZDy19vy2d8sEjpoytlj 0WWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zVPSsi0ckWW+NDOnThRgNCDXsF2fYgxmHf0H/s3WIvA=; b=CgHx4G5+YbyRgnfhIebsXc768UUEf4nB/4J/QPcVXrpI+yzjEwB7v3yewNkPWOfL/J EDOe8UJjo/dETch9ointgQ730aE1KQODKsdOamKz7WG58X9kUooPuMk80kditQQHgxwz 9eKiGn3kJJSBTL2m1SxrLTP8dRhXN5XEqqzlTp+bPOlIf/R4RYD7Ues4827r1XwJFeuQ IxHRyF4Hyw8bPgMoW5QbR0TUZfRqpb3Bl6fWVjiKMhD7Z+Ocf9RkPQpqjeTAICHtoBrp Da4qTyYBAImtE7RLRu26FSHbCjrIEisyH0iwVD36ib7g8AHO04rJggh9ao8iWCX8I5Kf qd+A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVLgM5HJrgP7H89R/HQDvdoDn4zKbjRZxssw9/g9vamk2eHQ3ao PCjTtBvE+flqADDhmoWzQ9oVea0V2PQtx3F+CVAV X-Received: by 2002:ac8:3462:: with SMTP id v31mr7117578qtb.330.1570675268898; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:41:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Iurii Zaikin Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:40:32 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] fs/ext4/inode-test: KUnit test for ext4 inode. To: Shuah Khan Cc: "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" , adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, Brendan Higgins Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org > > Hi Iurii, > > Thanks for the patch. > > On 10/8/19 8:42 PM, Iurii Zaikin wrote: > > Note: this patch is intended to be applied against kselftest/test branch: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git/log/?h=test > > > > > This doesn't belong here. You can add it to commit header > > [PATCH linux-kselftest/test] also you don't need v1 in there. > > > KUnit tests for decoding extended 64 bit timestamps. > > Please give more details on what these tests do. More information > on range of timestamps would be helpful. I see you have 2038 test > and it would be great to call out the ranges and conditions it is > resting. Added the link to the ext4 docs from which the tests were derived. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Iurii Zaikin > > --- > > fs/ext4/Kconfig | 12 +++ > > fs/ext4/Makefile | 1 + > > fs/ext4/inode-test.c | 217 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 230 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 fs/ext4/inode-test.c > > > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/Kconfig b/fs/ext4/Kconfig > > index cbb5ca830e57..72c26abbce4c 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/Kconfig > > +++ b/fs/ext4/Kconfig > > @@ -106,3 +106,15 @@ config EXT4_DEBUG > > If you select Y here, then you will be able to turn on debugging > > with a command such as: > > echo 1 > /sys/module/ext4/parameters/mballoc_debug > > + > > +config EXT4_INODE_KUNIT_TEST > > + bool "KUnit test for ext4 inode" > > + depends on EXT4_FS > > + depends on KUNIT > > + help > > + This builds the ext4 inode sysctl unit test, which runs on boot. > > + Tests the encoding correctness of ext4 inode. > > + 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. > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/Makefile b/fs/ext4/Makefile > > index b17ddc229ac5..1eeb8b449255 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/Makefile > > +++ b/fs/ext4/Makefile > > @@ -13,4 +13,5 @@ ext4-y := balloc.o bitmap.o block_validity.o dir.o > > ext4_jbd2.o extents.o \ > > > > ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL) += acl.o > > ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_SECURITY) += xattr_security.o > > +ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_INODE_KUNIT_TEST) += inode-test.o > > ext4-$(CONFIG_FS_VERITY) += verity.o > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..0ecb8dd5e0c5 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,217 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > Follow the commenting style recommended in the coding-style doc. > /* ---- */ Done > > > +/* > > + * KUnit test of ext4 inode. > > + */ > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > +#include > > + > > +#include "ext4.h" > > + > > +// binary: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 > > +#define LOWER_MSB_0 0L > > +// binary: 01111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 > > +#define UPPER_MSB_0 0x7fffffffL > > +// binary: 10000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 > > +#define LOWER_MSB_1 (-0x80000000L) > > +// binary: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 > > +#define UPPER_MSB_1 (-1L) > > + > > +#define CASE_NAME_FORMAT "%s: msb:%x lower_bound:%x extra_bits: %x" > > + > > +struct timestamp_expectation { > > + const char *test_case_name; > > + struct timespec64 expected; > > + u32 extra_bits; > > + bool msb_set; > > + bool lower_bound; > > +}; > > + > > +static time64_t get_32bit_time(const struct timestamp_expectation * const test) > > +{ > > + if (test->msb_set) { > > + if (test->lower_bound) > > + return LOWER_MSB_1; > > + > > + return UPPER_MSB_1; > > + } > > Can you add information on what you are trying to test. > Please do the same for all tests. > > > + > > + if (test->lower_bound) > > + return LOWER_MSB_0; > > + return UPPER_MSB_0; > > +} > > + > > + > > +static void inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding(struct kunit *test) > > +{ > > + const struct timestamp_expectation test_data[] = { > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "1901-12-13", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 0, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = -0x80000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > I see that you use the same tv_nsec for all tests. Is there > a reason for that? Would it be helpful to vary it? Done. > > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "1969-12-31", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 0, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = -1LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "1970-01-01", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 0, > > + .expected = {0LL, 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2038-01-19", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 0, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x7fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2038-01-19", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 1, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x80000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2106-02-07", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 1, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0xffffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2106-02-07", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 1, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x100000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0LL}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2174-02-25", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 1, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x17fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2174-02-25", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 2, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x180000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2242-03-16", > > + .msb_set = true, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 2, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x1ffffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2242-03-16", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 2, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x200000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = " 2310-04-04", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 2, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x27fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > Get rid of this. Add it when you can add it later. I don't > like to see these TODOs with blocks of code commented out. Done > > > + /* TODO: enable when legacy encoding in ext4.h is disabled. > > + *{ > > + * .test_case_name = "2310-04-04", > > + * .msb_set = true, > > + * .lower_bound = true, > > + * .extra_bits = 3, > > + * .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x280000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + *}, > > + * > > + *{ > > + * .test_case_name = "2378-04-22", > > + * .msb_set = true, > > + * .lower_bound = false, > > + * .extra_bits = 3, > > + * .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x2ffffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + * }, > > + */ > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2378-04-22", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = true, > > + .extra_bits = 3, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x300000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + }, > > + > > + { > > + .test_case_name = "2446-05-10", > > + .msb_set = false, > > + .lower_bound = false, > > + .extra_bits = 3, > > + .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x37fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, > > + } > > + }; > > + > > + struct timespec64 timestamp; > > + int i; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_data); ++i) { > > + timestamp.tv_sec = get_32bit_time(&test_data[i]); > > + ext4_decode_extra_time(×tamp, > > + cpu_to_le32(test_data[i].extra_bits)); > > + > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, > > + test_data[i].expected.tv_sec, > > + timestamp.tv_sec, > > + CASE_NAME_FORMAT, > > + test_data[i].test_case_name, > > + test_data[i].msb_set, > > + test_data[i].lower_bound, > > + test_data[i].extra_bits); > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, > > + test_data[i].expected.tv_nsec, > > + timestamp.tv_nsec, > > + CASE_NAME_FORMAT, > > + test_data[i].test_case_name, > > + test_data[i].msb_set, > > + test_data[i].lower_bound, > > + test_data[i].extra_bits); > > + } > > +} > > + > > +static struct kunit_case ext4_inode_test_cases[] = { > > + KUNIT_CASE(inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding), > > + {} > > +}; > > + > > +static struct kunit_suite ext4_inode_test_suite = { > > + .name = "ext4_inode_test", > > + .test_cases = ext4_inode_test_cases, > > +}; > > + > > +kunit_test_suite(ext4_inode_test_suite); > > -- > > 2.23.0.700.g56cf767bdb-goog > > > > thanks, > -- Shuah > Whitespace in this patch (ok, I'm assuming that there was some whitespace) > is severely damaged. I.e., gone. Sorry, used different email client this time. > I'd suggest using "ext4: add kunit test for decoding extended > timestamps" as the one-line summary, and we probably don't need > anything else. Done > Should we perhaps just call the cofnig "EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS"? Done