Rasmus Villemoes <li...@rasmusvillemoes.dk> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 26 2015, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Add a couple of simple tests for string_get_size().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> lib/test-string_helpers.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/test-string_helpers.c b/lib/test-string_helpers.c
>> index 8e376ef..a158cb3 100644
>> --- a/lib/test-string_helpers.c
>> +++ b/lib/test-string_helpers.c
>> @@ -326,6 +326,47 @@ out:
>> kfree(out_test);
>> }
>>
>> +#define string_get_size_maxbuf 16
>> +#define test_string_get_size_one(size, blk_size, units, exp_result)
>> \
>> + do { \
>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(exp_result) >= string_get_size_maxbuf); \
>> + __test_string_get_size((size), (blk_size), (units), \
>> + (exp_result)); \
>> + } while (0)
>> +
>> +
>> +static __init void __test_string_get_size(const u64 size, const u32
>> blk_size,
>> + const enum string_size_units units,
>> + const char *exp_result)
>> +{
>> + char buf[string_get_size_maxbuf];
>> +
>> + string_get_size(size, blk_size, units, buf, sizeof(buf));
>> + if (!memcmp(buf, exp_result, strlen(exp_result) + 1))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + buf[sizeof(buf) - 1] = '\0';
>> + pr_warn("Test 'test_string_get_size_one' failed!\n");
>> + pr_warn("string_get_size(size = %llu, blk_size = %u, units = %d\n",
>> + size, blk_size, units);
>> + pr_warn("expected: '%s', got '%s'\n", exp_result, buf);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static __init void test_string_get_size(void)
>> +{
>> + test_string_get_size_one(16384, 512, STRING_UNITS_2, "8.00 MiB");
>> + test_string_get_size_one(500118192, 512, STRING_UNITS_2, "238 GiB");
>> + test_string_get_size_one(8192, 4096, STRING_UNITS_10, "33.5 MB");
>> + test_string_get_size_one(1100, 1, STRING_UNITS_10, "1.10 kB");
>> + test_string_get_size_one(3000, 1900, STRING_UNITS_10, "5.70 MB");
>> + test_string_get_size_one(151234561234657, 3456789, STRING_UNITS_10,
>> + "522 EB");
>
> Since we're changing this anyway, can't we test every pair of
> (size,blk_size) with both units? That'll be twice the number of tests
> for less horizontal real estate. E.g.
>
> test_string_get_size_one(8192, 4096, "32.0 MiB", "33.5 MB");
>
Nice idea, will do.
> Do we really care how and if string_get_size works for a non-power-of-2
> blk_size?
Probably not but there is nothing in current algorithm which prevents it
from working correctly with a non-power-of-2 blk_sizes. The issue you
found is even more visible on (3000, 1900) test.
> I certainly assume that we're passed a non-zero value.
Oh crap, we don't have a check for blk_size = 0 and this leads to an
infinite loop now... will do something in v2.
>
> Rasmus
--
Vitaly
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
