1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. [PATCH v2 0/5] Rosebush, a new hash table
  4. View patch

[PATCH v2 3/5] rosebush: Add test suite

Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) posted 5 patches 1 year, 5 months ago
[PATCH v2 3/5] rosebush: Add test suite
Posted by Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) 1 year, 5 months ago 
This is not a very sophisticated test suite yet, but it helped find
a few bugs and provides a framework for adding more tests as more
bugs are found.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
---
 lib/Kconfig.debug   |   3 +
 lib/Makefile        |   1 +
 lib/test_rosebush.c | 140 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 144 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 lib/test_rosebush.c

diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
index 59b6765d86b8..f3cfd79d8dbd 100644
--- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
+++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
@@ -2447,6 +2447,9 @@ config TEST_RHASHTABLE
 
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
+config TEST_ROSEBUSH
+	tristate "Test the Rosebush data structure"
+
 config TEST_IDA
 	tristate "Perform selftest on IDA functions"
 
diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile
index 723e6c90b58d..de4edefc2c11 100644
--- a/lib/Makefile
+++ b/lib/Makefile
@@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_LIST_SORT) += test_list_sort.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_MIN_HEAP) += test_min_heap.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_LKM) += test_module.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_VMALLOC) += test_vmalloc.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_ROSEBUSH) += test_rosebush.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_RHASHTABLE) += test_rhashtable.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_SORT) += test_sort.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_USER_COPY) += test_user_copy.o
diff --git a/lib/test_rosebush.c b/lib/test_rosebush.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..59c342e7a5b3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/test_rosebush.c
@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+#include <linux/rosebush.h>
+#include <kunit/test.h>
+
+static void iter_rbh(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh, u32 hash, void *p)
+{
+	RBH_ITER(iter, rbh, hash);
+	void *q;
+
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	q = rbh_next(&iter);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, p, q,
+		"rbh_next hash:%u returned %px, expected %px", hash, q, p);
+	q = rbh_next(&iter);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, NULL, q,
+		"rbh_next hash:%u returned %px, expected NULL", hash, q);
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+}
+
+static void check_empty_rbh(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh)
+{
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 0, NULL);
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 1, NULL);
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 17, NULL);
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 42, NULL);
+}
+
+static void test_insert(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh, u32 hash)
+{
+	void *p = (void *)((hash << 1) | 1UL);
+	int err;
+
+	err = rbh_insert(rbh, hash, p);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, 0);
+
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, hash, p);
+}
+
+static void test_reserve(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh, u32 hash)
+{
+	int err;
+
+	err = rbh_reserve(rbh, hash);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, 0);
+
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, hash, NULL);
+}
+
+static void test_use(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh, u32 hash)
+{
+	void *p = (void *)((hash << 1) | 1UL);
+	int err;
+
+	err = rbh_use(rbh, hash, p);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, 0);
+
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, hash, p);
+}
+
+static void test_remove(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh, u32 hash)
+{
+	void *p = (void *)((hash << 1) | 1UL);
+	int err;
+
+	err = rbh_remove(rbh, hash, p);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, 0);
+
+	iter_rbh(test, rbh, hash, NULL);
+}
+
+static DEFINE_ROSEBUSH(rosebush);
+
+/*
+ * Conduct a number of tests on a rosebush that has never been used.
+ * They should all return NULL or an errno.  We're looking for crashes
+ * here.
+ */
+static void empty(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	int err;
+
+	check_empty_rbh(test, &rosebush);
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 0, test);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+	err = rbh_use(&rosebush, 0, test);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rosebush.rbh_table, 0);
+}
+
+static void first(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	int err;
+
+	test_insert(test, &rosebush, 5);
+	check_empty_rbh(test, &rosebush);
+	test_remove(test, &rosebush, 5);
+	check_empty_rbh(test, &rosebush);
+
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 5, NULL);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+	test_reserve(test, &rosebush, 5);
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 5, test);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 5, NULL);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, 0);
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 5, NULL);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+
+	test_reserve(test, &rosebush, 5);
+	test_use(test, &rosebush, 5);
+	err = rbh_remove(&rosebush, 5, NULL);
+	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, -ENOENT);
+	test_remove(test, &rosebush, 5);
+}
+
+static void grow(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 3; i < 3333; i += 2)
+		test_insert(test, &rosebush, i);
+
+	rbh_destroy(&rosebush);
+}
+
+static struct kunit_case rosebush_cases[] __refdata = {
+	KUNIT_CASE(empty),
+	KUNIT_CASE(first),
+	KUNIT_CASE(grow),
+	{}
+};
+
+static struct kunit_suite rosebush_suite = {
+	.name = "rosebush",
+	.test_cases = rosebush_cases,
+};
+
+kunit_test_suite(rosebush_suite);
+
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
-- 
2.43.0
Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] rosebush: Add test suite
Posted by Jeff Johnson 1 year, 5 months ago 
On 6/25/24 14:17, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> This is not a very sophisticated test suite yet, but it helped find
> a few bugs and provides a framework for adding more tests as more
> bugs are found.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> ---
...
> +static struct kunit_suite rosebush_suite = {
> +	.name = "rosebush",
> +	.test_cases = rosebush_cases,
> +};
> +
> +kunit_test_suite(rosebush_suite);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");

make W=1 will warn if there isn't also a MODULE_DESCRIPTION()
Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] rosebush: Add test suite
Posted by Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) 1 year, 5 months ago 
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:17:58PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> This is not a very sophisticated test suite yet, but it helped find
> a few bugs and provides a framework for adding more tests as more
> bugs are found.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> ---
>  lib/Kconfig.debug   |   3 +
>  lib/Makefile        |   1 +
>  lib/test_rosebush.c | 140 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 144 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 lib/test_rosebush.c
> 
> diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> index 59b6765d86b8..f3cfd79d8dbd 100644
> --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> @@ -2447,6 +2447,9 @@ config TEST_RHASHTABLE
>  
>  	  If unsure, say N.
>  
> +config TEST_ROSEBUSH
> +	tristate "Test the Rosebush data structure"
> +

This needs a `depends on KUNIT`.

And compiling this test as module results in rbh_destroy not found. I
think you missed EXPORT_SYMBOL of rbh_destroy in the previous patch.

>  config TEST_IDA
>  	tristate "Perform selftest on IDA functions"
>  
> +
> +static void check_empty_rbh(struct kunit *test, struct rbh *rbh)
> +{
> +	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 0, NULL);
> +	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 1, NULL);
> +	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 17, NULL);
> +	iter_rbh(test, rbh, 42, NULL);
> +}

Do these hashes hold any significance that you test them often after an
insert?

--
Pankaj

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.