kernel/resource_kunit.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+)
This mainly tests that find_next_iomem_res() does not miss resources.
Signed-off-by: Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com>
---
v2: update subject, use DEFINE_RES_NAMED and hardcoded offsets
v3: really hardcode offsets, with 4KB intervals since 0x1000 is easier
to read than 0x400
v4: use RESOURCE_SIZE_MAX, split allocate_resource and KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ,
and other cosmetic changes
v5: include linux/limits.h, add a comment on the resource layout, and
add more negative tests for holes
---
kernel/resource_kunit.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/resource_kunit.c b/kernel/resource_kunit.c
index 58ab9f914602b..b13f01f290606 100644
--- a/kernel/resource_kunit.c
+++ b/kernel/resource_kunit.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
#include <kunit/test.h>
#include <linux/ioport.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/limits.h>
#include <linux/string.h>
#define R0_START 0x0000
@@ -137,9 +138,107 @@ static void resource_test_intersection(struct kunit *test)
} while (++i < ARRAY_SIZE(results_for_intersection));
}
+static int resource_walk_count(struct resource *res, void *data)
+{
+ int *count = data;
+
+ (*count)++;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void resource_test_walk_iomem_res_desc(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct resource root = {
+ .name = "Resource Walk Test",
+ };
+ struct resource res[8];
+ int count;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = allocate_resource(&iomem_resource, &root, 0x100000,
+ 0, RESOURCE_SIZE_MAX, 0x100000, NULL, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0, ret);
+
+ /* build the resource tree under the test root:
+ *
+ * 0x0000-0x0fff: res[0], a match
+ * 0x1000-0x1fff: res[1], a non-match
+ * 0x2000-0x2fff: a hole
+ * 0x3000-0x3fff: res[2], a non-match
+ * 0x3800-0x3bff: res[3], a match
+ * 0x4000-0x4fff: res[4], a match
+ */
+ res[0] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x0000, 0x1000, "SYSRAM 1",
+ IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
+ res[1] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x1000, 0x1000, "OTHER", 0);
+
+ res[2] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x3000, 0x1000, "NESTED", 0);
+ res[3] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x3800, 0x0400, "SYSRAM 2",
+ IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
+
+ res[4] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x4000, 0x1000, "SYSRAM 3",
+ IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[0]));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[1]));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[2]));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&res[2], &res[3]));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[4]));
+
+ /* walk the entire region */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ root.start, root.end, &count, resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3);
+
+ /* walk the region requested by res[0] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[0].start, res[0].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
+
+ /* walk the region requested by res[1] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[1].start, res[1].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
+
+ /* walk the hole between res[1] and res[2] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[1].end + 1, res[2].start - 1, &count,
+ resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
+
+ /* walk the region requested by res[2] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[2].start, res[2].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
+
+ /* walk the holes before and after res[3] nested under res[2] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[2].start, res[3].start - 1, &count,
+ resource_walk_count);
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[2].end + 1, res[3].end, &count,
+ resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
+
+ /* walk the region requested by res[4] */
+ count = 0;
+ walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
+ res[4].start, res[4].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
+
+ release_resource(&root);
+}
+
static struct kunit_case resource_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_union),
KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_intersection),
+ KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_walk_iomem_res_desc),
{}
};
--
2.45.1.467.gbab1589fc0-googOn Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 05:39:48PM -0700, Chia-I Wu wrote: > This mainly tests that find_next_iomem_res() does not miss resources. Read Submitting Patches documentation on imperative mood and modify the commit message to follow. ... > + /* build the resource tree under the test root: > + * > + * 0x0000-0x0fff: res[0], a match > + * 0x1000-0x1fff: res[1], a non-match > + * 0x2000-0x2fff: a hole > + * 0x3000-0x3fff: res[2], a non-match > + * 0x3800-0x3bff: res[3], a match > + * 0x4000-0x4fff: res[4], a match > + */ /* * This is good, but multi-line comment * style is broken along with English grammar, i.e. * do not forget that sentences are started with * a capital letter. */ ... Please, do not send a new version this week. Take your time. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 5:40 PM Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This mainly tests that find_next_iomem_res() does not miss resources.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com>
>
> ---
> v2: update subject, use DEFINE_RES_NAMED and hardcoded offsets
> v3: really hardcode offsets, with 4KB intervals since 0x1000 is easier
> to read than 0x400
> v4: use RESOURCE_SIZE_MAX, split allocate_resource and KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ,
> and other cosmetic changes
> v5: include linux/limits.h, add a comment on the resource layout, and
> add more negative tests for holes
> ---
> kernel/resource_kunit.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/resource_kunit.c b/kernel/resource_kunit.c
> index 58ab9f914602b..b13f01f290606 100644
> --- a/kernel/resource_kunit.c
> +++ b/kernel/resource_kunit.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> #include <kunit/test.h>
> #include <linux/ioport.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/limits.h>
> #include <linux/string.h>
>
> #define R0_START 0x0000
> @@ -137,9 +138,107 @@ static void resource_test_intersection(struct kunit *test)
> } while (++i < ARRAY_SIZE(results_for_intersection));
> }
>
> +static int resource_walk_count(struct resource *res, void *data)
> +{
> + int *count = data;
> +
> + (*count)++;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void resource_test_walk_iomem_res_desc(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct resource root = {
> + .name = "Resource Walk Test",
> + };
> + struct resource res[8];
> + int count;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = allocate_resource(&iomem_resource, &root, 0x100000,
> + 0, RESOURCE_SIZE_MAX, 0x100000, NULL, NULL);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0, ret);
> +
> + /* build the resource tree under the test root:
> + *
> + * 0x0000-0x0fff: res[0], a match
> + * 0x1000-0x1fff: res[1], a non-match
> + * 0x2000-0x2fff: a hole
> + * 0x3000-0x3fff: res[2], a non-match
> + * 0x3800-0x3bff: res[3], a match
> + * 0x4000-0x4fff: res[4], a match
> + */
> + res[0] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x0000, 0x1000, "SYSRAM 1",
> + IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
> + res[1] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x1000, 0x1000, "OTHER", 0);
> +
> + res[2] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x3000, 0x1000, "NESTED", 0);
> + res[3] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x3800, 0x0400, "SYSRAM 2",
> + IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
> +
> + res[4] = DEFINE_RES_NAMED(root.start + 0x4000, 0x1000, "SYSRAM 3",
> + IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[0]));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[1]));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[2]));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&res[2], &res[3]));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, request_resource(&root, &res[4]));
> +
> + /* walk the entire region */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + root.start, root.end, &count, resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 3);
> +
> + /* walk the region requested by res[0] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[0].start, res[0].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
> +
> + /* walk the region requested by res[1] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[1].start, res[1].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
> +
> + /* walk the hole between res[1] and res[2] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[1].end + 1, res[2].start - 1, &count,
> + resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
> +
> + /* walk the region requested by res[2] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[2].start, res[2].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
> +
> + /* walk the holes before and after res[3] nested under res[2] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[2].start, res[3].start - 1, &count,
> + resource_walk_count);
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[2].end + 1, res[3].end, &count,
This should be from "res[3].end + 1" to "res[2].end". Not sure if I
should resend or if you can make the fix when applying.
> + resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 0);
> +
> + /* walk the region requested by res[4] */
> + count = 0;
> + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> + res[4].start, res[4].end, &count, resource_walk_count);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, count, 1);
> +
> + release_resource(&root);
> +}
> +
> static struct kunit_case resource_test_cases[] = {
> KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_union),
> KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_intersection),
> + KUNIT_CASE(resource_test_walk_iomem_res_desc),
> {}
> };
>
> --
> 2.45.1.467.gbab1589fc0-goog
>
On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 05:46:16PM -0700, Chia-I Wu wrote: > On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 5:40 PM Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > This mainly tests that find_next_iomem_res() does not miss resources. ... > > + walk_iomem_res_desc(IORES_DESC_NONE, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM, > > + res[2].end + 1, res[3].end, &count, > This should be from "res[3].end + 1" to "res[2].end". Not sure if I > should resend or if you can make the fix when applying. Please, slow down. You sent three (!) versions over a day, this is against the recommendations. And it seems you want to learn a hard way the clear thing: Hurrying just increases a chance of a mistake. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.