Re: [PATCH 09/10] t-reftable-block: add tests for obj blocks
From: Patrick Steinhardt <hidden>
Date: 2024-08-15 09:51:17
On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 05:33:17PM +0530, Chandra Pratap wrote:
In the current testing setup, block operations are left unexercised for obj blocks. Add a test that exercises these operations for obj blocks.
Same remarks here as for the preceding commit.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -186,9 +186,88 @@ static void t_log_block_read_write(void) reftable_record_release(&recs[i]); } +static void t_obj_block_read_write(void) +{ + const int header_off = 21; + struct reftable_record recs[30]; + const size_t N = ARRAY_SIZE(recs); + const size_t block_size = 1024; + struct reftable_block block = { 0 }; + struct block_writer bw = { + .last_key = STRBUF_INIT, + }; + struct reftable_record rec = { + .type = BLOCK_TYPE_OBJ, + }; + size_t i = 0; + int n; + struct block_reader br = { 0 }; + struct block_iter it = BLOCK_ITER_INIT; + struct strbuf want = STRBUF_INIT; + + REFTABLE_CALLOC_ARRAY(block.data, block_size); + block.len = block_size; + block.source = malloc_block_source(); + block_writer_init(&bw, BLOCK_TYPE_OBJ, block.data, block_size, + header_off, hash_size(GIT_SHA1_FORMAT_ID)); + + for (i = 0; i < N; i++) { + uint8_t *bytes = reftable_malloc(sizeof(uint8_t[5])); + memcpy(bytes, (uint8_t[]){i, i+1, i+2, i+3, i+5}, sizeof(uint8_t[5]));
From the top of my head I'm not sure whether we use inline-array declarations like this anywhere. I'd rather just make it a separate variable, which also allows us to get rid of the magic 5 via `ARRAY_SIZE()`. Patrick