The new test demonstrates known bugs: integers between INT64_MAX+1 and
UINT64_MAX rejected, and integers between INT64_MIN and -1 are
accepted modulo 2^64.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
---
tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c b/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c
index 6eb48fe..f965743 100644
--- a/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c
+++ b/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c
@@ -116,6 +116,34 @@ static void test_visitor_in_int(TestInputVisitorData *data,
g_assert_cmpint(res, ==, value);
}
+static void test_visitor_in_uint(TestInputVisitorData *data,
+ const void *unused)
+{
+ Error *err = NULL;
+ uint64_t res = 0;
+ int value = 42;
+ Visitor *v;
+
+ v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "%d", value);
+
+ visit_type_uint64(v, NULL, &res, &error_abort);
+ g_assert_cmpuint(res, ==, (uint64_t)value);
+
+ /* BUG: value between INT64_MIN and -1 accepted modulo 2^64 */
+
+ v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "%d", -value);
+
+ visit_type_uint64(v, NULL, &res, &error_abort);
+ g_assert_cmpuint(res, ==, (uint64_t)-value);
+
+ /* BUG: value between INT64_MAX+1 and UINT64_MAX rejected */
+
+ v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "18446744073709551574");
+
+ visit_type_uint64(v, NULL, &res, &err);
+ error_free_or_abort(&err);
+}
+
static void test_visitor_in_int_overflow(TestInputVisitorData *data,
const void *unused)
{
@@ -1225,6 +1253,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
input_visitor_test_add("/visitor/input/int",
NULL, test_visitor_in_int);
+ input_visitor_test_add("/visitor/input/uint",
+ NULL, test_visitor_in_uint);
input_visitor_test_add("/visitor/input/int_overflow",
NULL, test_visitor_in_int_overflow);
input_visitor_test_add("/visitor/input/int_keyval",
--
2.7.4
On 03/21/2017 12:44 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > The new test demonstrates known bugs: integers between INT64_MAX+1 and > UINT64_MAX rejected, and integers between INT64_MIN and -1 are > accepted modulo 2^64. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> > --- > tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c b/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c > index 6eb48fe..f965743 100644 > --- a/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c > +++ b/tests/test-qobject-input-visitor.c > @@ -116,6 +116,34 @@ static void test_visitor_in_int(TestInputVisitorData *data, > g_assert_cmpint(res, ==, value); > } > > +static void test_visitor_in_uint(TestInputVisitorData *data, > + const void *unused) > +{ > + Error *err = NULL; > + uint64_t res = 0; > + int value = 42; > + Visitor *v; > + > + v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "%d", value); Another place where I have to rebase my work that gets rid of the dynamic JSON parser, if we want to revive that patch series; but don't let it stop you on this patch. > + > + visit_type_uint64(v, NULL, &res, &error_abort); > + g_assert_cmpuint(res, ==, (uint64_t)value); > + > + /* BUG: value between INT64_MIN and -1 accepted modulo 2^64 */ > + > + v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "%d", -value); Not necessarily a bug - libvirt exploits this behavior. So even if we fix the real bug, namely... > + > + visit_type_uint64(v, NULL, &res, &error_abort); > + g_assert_cmpuint(res, ==, (uint64_t)-value); > + > + /* BUG: value between INT64_MAX+1 and UINT64_MAX rejected */ > + > + v = visitor_input_test_init(data, "18446744073709551574"); ...this, we may be stuck keeping the modulo 2^64 parsing around for back-compat. At any rate, your test is a welcome addition; and as it only touches the testsuite, it is still 2.9 material if desired. Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.