Thread (55 messages) 55 messages, 3 authors, 2019-08-12

Re: [PATCH v9 04/18] kunit: test: add kunit_stream a std::stream like logger

From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Date: 2019-07-15 22:16:01
Also in: dri-devel, linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, linux-kbuild, linux-kselftest, linux-um, lkml, nvdimm

Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-07-12 01:17:30)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/include/kunit/kunit-stream.h b/include/kunit/kunit-stream.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..a7b53eabf6be4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/kunit/kunit-stream.h
@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+/*
+ * C++ stream style string formatter and printer used in KUnit for outputting
+ * KUnit messages.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2019, Google LLC.
+ * Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
+ */
+
+#ifndef _KUNIT_KUNIT_STREAM_H
+#define _KUNIT_KUNIT_STREAM_H
+
+#include <linux/types.h>
+#include <kunit/string-stream.h>
+
+struct kunit;
+
+/**
+ * struct kunit_stream - a std::stream style string builder.
+ *
+ * A std::stream style string builder. Allows messages to be built up and
+ * printed all at once.
+ */
+struct kunit_stream {
+       /* private: internal use only. */
+       struct kunit *test;
+       const char *level;
Is the level changed? See my comment below, but I wonder if this whole
struct can go away and the wrappers can just operate on 'struct
string_stream' instead.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+       struct string_stream *internal_stream;
+};
diff --git a/kunit/kunit-stream.c b/kunit/kunit-stream.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..8bea1f22eafb5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/kunit/kunit-stream.c
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * C++ stream style string formatter and printer used in KUnit for outputting
+ * KUnit messages.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2019, Google LLC.
+ * Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
+ */
+
+#include <kunit/test.h>
+#include <kunit/kunit-stream.h>
+#include <kunit/string-stream.h>
+
+void kunit_stream_add(struct kunit_stream *kstream, const char *fmt, ...)
+{
+       va_list args;
+       struct string_stream *stream = kstream->internal_stream;
+
+       va_start(args, fmt);
+
+       if (string_stream_vadd(stream, fmt, args) < 0)
+               kunit_err(kstream->test,
+                         "Failed to allocate fragment: %s\n",
+                         fmt);
+
+       va_end(args);
+}
+
+void kunit_stream_append(struct kunit_stream *kstream,
+                               struct kunit_stream *other)
+{
+       struct string_stream *other_stream = other->internal_stream;
+       const char *other_content;
+
+       other_content = string_stream_get_string(other_stream);
+
+       if (!other_content) {
+               kunit_err(kstream->test,
+                         "Failed to get string from second argument for appending\n");
+               return;
+       }
+
+       kunit_stream_add(kstream, other_content);
+}
Why can't this function be implemented in the string_stream API? Seems
valid to want to append one stream to another and that isn't
kunit_stream specific.
+
+void kunit_stream_clear(struct kunit_stream *kstream)
+{
+       string_stream_clear(kstream->internal_stream);
+}
+
+void kunit_stream_commit(struct kunit_stream *kstream)
+{
+       struct string_stream *stream = kstream->internal_stream;
+       struct string_stream_fragment *fragment;
+       struct kunit *test = kstream->test;
+       char *buf;
+
+       buf = string_stream_get_string(stream);
+       if (!buf) {
+               kunit_err(test,
+                         "Could not allocate buffer, dumping stream:\n");
+               list_for_each_entry(fragment, &stream->fragments, node) {
+                       kunit_err(test, fragment->fragment);
+               }
+               kunit_err(test, "\n");
+               goto cleanup;
+       }
+
+       kunit_printk(kstream->level, test, buf);
+       kfree(buf);
+
+cleanup:
Drop the goto and use an 'else' please.
+       kunit_stream_clear(kstream);
+}
+
+static int kunit_stream_init(struct kunit_resource *res, void *context)
+{
+       struct kunit *test = context;
+       struct kunit_stream *stream;
+
+       stream = kzalloc(sizeof(*stream), GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!stream)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+
+       res->allocation = stream;
+       stream->test = test;
+       stream->internal_stream = alloc_string_stream(test);
+
+       if (!stream->internal_stream)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
+static void kunit_stream_free(struct kunit_resource *res)
+{
+       struct kunit_stream *stream = res->allocation;
+
+       if (!string_stream_is_empty(stream->internal_stream)) {
+               kunit_err(stream->test,
+                         "End of test case reached with uncommitted stream entries\n");
+               kunit_stream_commit(stream);
+       }
+}
+
Nitpick: Drop this extra newline.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/kunit/test.c b/kunit/test.c
index f165c9d8e10b0..29edf34a89a37 100644
--- a/kunit/test.c
+++ b/kunit/test.c
@@ -120,6 +120,12 @@ static void kunit_print_test_case_ok_not_ok(struct kunit_case *test_case,
                              test_case->name);
 }
 
+void kunit_fail(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_stream *stream)
Why doesn't 'struct kunit' have a 'struct kunit_stream' inside of it? It
seems that the two are highly related, to the point that it might just
make sense to have

	struct kunit {
		struct kunit_stream stream;
		...
	};
+{
+       kunit_set_failure(test);
+       kunit_stream_commit(stream);
And then this function can just take a test and the stream can be
associated with the test directly. Use container_of() to get to the test
when the only pointer in hand is for the stream too.
+}
+
 void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name)
 {
        mutex_init(&test->lock);
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help