On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 2:26 PM Brendan Higgins
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:08 PM shuah [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 8/20/19 12:24 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:24:45AM -0600, shuah wrote:

quoted

On 8/13/19 11:50 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:

quoted

## TL;DR

This revision addresses comments from Stephen and Bjorn Helgaas. Most
changes are pretty minor stuff that doesn't affect the API in anyway.
One significant change, however, is that I added support for freeing
kunit_resource managed resources before the test case is finished via
kunit_resource_destroy(). Additionally, Bjorn pointed out that I broke
KUnit on certain configurations (like the default one for x86, whoops).

Based on Stephen's feedback on the previous change, I think we are
pretty close. I am not expecting any significant changes from here on
out.

Hi Brendan,

I found checkpatch errors in one or two patches. Can you fix those and
send v14.

Hi Shuah,

Are you refering to the following errors?

ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses
#144: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:456:
+#define KUNIT_BINARY_CLASS \
+       kunit_binary_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT

ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses
#146: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:458:
+#define KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_CLASS \
+       kunit_binary_ptr_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_PTR_ASSERT_STRUCT

These values should *not* be in parentheses. I am guessing checkpatch is
getting confused and thinks that these are complex expressions, when
they are not.

I ignored the errors since I figured checkpatch was complaining
erroneously.

I could refactor the code to remove these macros entirely, but I think
the code is cleaner with them.

Please do. I am not veru sure what value these macros add.

Alright, I will have something for you later today.

I just sent a new revision with the fix.

Cheers