Update memblock_alloc() tests so that they test either memblock_alloc()
or memblock_alloc_raw() depending on the value of alloc_test_flags. Run
through all the existing tests in memblock_alloc_api twice: once for
memblock_alloc() and once for memblock_alloc_raw().
When the tests run memblock_alloc(), they test that the entire memory
region is zero. When the tests run memblock_alloc_raw(), they test that
the entire memory region is nonzero.
Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
---
tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c | 98 ++++++++++++++++--------
tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 25 ++++++
2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
index 65bff77dd55b..cf67687ae044 100644
--- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
+++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
@@ -1,6 +1,29 @@
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
#include "alloc_api.h"
+static const char * const func_testing[] = {
+ "memblock_alloc",
+ "memblock_alloc_raw"
+};
+
+static int alloc_test_flags = TEST_ZEROED;
+
+static inline const char * const get_func_testing(int flags)
+{
+ if (flags & TEST_RAW)
+ return func_testing[1];
+ else
+ return func_testing[0];
+}
+
+static inline void *run_memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
+{
+ if (alloc_test_flags & TEST_RAW)
+ return memblock_alloc_raw(size, align);
+ else
+ return memblock_alloc(size, align);
+}
+
/*
* A simple test that tries to allocate a small memory region.
* Expect to allocate an aligned region near the end of the available memory.
@@ -19,10 +42,10 @@ static int alloc_top_down_simple_check(void)
expected_start = memblock_end_of_DRAM() - SMP_CACHE_BYTES;
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, expected_start);
@@ -79,10 +102,10 @@ static int alloc_top_down_disjoint_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r2_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->size, r1.size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->base, r1.base);
@@ -126,10 +149,10 @@ static int alloc_top_down_before_check(void)
memblock_reserve(memblock_end_of_DRAM() - total_size, r1_size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r2_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_end_of_DRAM() - total_size);
@@ -176,10 +199,10 @@ static int alloc_top_down_after_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r2_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base - r2_size);
@@ -228,10 +251,10 @@ static int alloc_top_down_second_fit_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
memblock_reserve(r2.base, r2.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r3_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, r2.size + r3_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r2.base - r3_size);
@@ -284,10 +307,10 @@ static int alloc_in_between_generic_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
memblock_reserve(r2.base, r2.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r3_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base - r2.size - r3_size);
@@ -332,7 +355,7 @@ static int alloc_small_gaps_generic_check(void)
region_end += gap_size + region_size;
}
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(region_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(region_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_EQ(allocated_ptr, NULL);
@@ -356,7 +379,7 @@ static int alloc_all_reserved_generic_check(void)
/* Simulate full memory */
memblock_reserve(memblock_start_of_DRAM(), MEM_SIZE);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_256, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(SZ_256, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_EQ(allocated_ptr, NULL);
@@ -392,7 +415,7 @@ static int alloc_no_space_generic_check(void)
/* Simulate almost-full memory */
memblock_reserve(memblock_start_of_DRAM(), reserved_size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_1K, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(SZ_1K, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_EQ(allocated_ptr, NULL);
@@ -427,10 +450,10 @@ static int alloc_limited_space_generic_check(void)
/* Simulate almost-full memory */
memblock_reserve(memblock_start_of_DRAM(), reserved_size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(available_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(available_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, available_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, available_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, MEM_SIZE);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
@@ -457,7 +480,7 @@ static int alloc_no_memory_generic_check(void)
reset_memblock_regions();
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_1K, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(SZ_1K, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_EQ(allocated_ptr, NULL);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, 0);
@@ -491,7 +514,7 @@ static int alloc_too_large_generic_check(void)
setup_memblock();
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(MEM_SIZE + SZ_2, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(MEM_SIZE + SZ_2, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_EQ(allocated_ptr, NULL);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, 0);
@@ -517,10 +540,10 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_simple_check(void)
setup_memblock();
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_2, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(SZ_2, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, SZ_2);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, SZ_2, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, SZ_2);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
@@ -575,10 +598,10 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_disjoint_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r2_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->size, r1.size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->base, r1.base);
@@ -619,10 +642,10 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_before_check(void)
memblock_reserve(memblock_start_of_DRAM() + r1_size, r2_size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r1_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r1_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r1_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r1_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
@@ -668,10 +691,10 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_after_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r2_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base);
@@ -721,10 +744,10 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_second_fit_check(void)
memblock_reserve(r1.base, r1.size);
memblock_reserve(r2.base, r2.size);
- allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ allocated_ptr = run_memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
- ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
+ verify_mem_content(allocated_ptr, r3_size, alloc_test_flags);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, r2.size + r3_size);
ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r2.base);
@@ -856,13 +879,14 @@ static int alloc_too_large_check(void)
return 0;
}
-int memblock_alloc_checks(void)
+static int memblock_alloc_checks_internal(int flags)
{
- const char *func_testing = "memblock_alloc";
+ const char *func = get_func_testing(flags);
+ alloc_test_flags = flags;
prefix_reset();
- prefix_push(func_testing);
- test_print("Running %s tests...\n", func_testing);
+ prefix_push(func);
+ test_print("Running %s tests...\n", func);
reset_memblock_attributes();
dummy_physical_memory_init();
@@ -886,3 +910,11 @@ int memblock_alloc_checks(void)
return 0;
}
+
+int memblock_alloc_checks(void)
+{
+ memblock_alloc_checks_internal(TEST_ZEROED);
+ memblock_alloc_checks_internal(TEST_RAW);
+
+ return 0;
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
index 58f84bf2c9ae..4fd3534ff955 100644
--- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
+++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
@@ -12,6 +12,11 @@
#define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K
+enum test_flags {
+ TEST_ZEROED = 0x0,
+ TEST_RAW = 0x1
+};
+
/**
* ASSERT_EQ():
* Check the condition
@@ -63,6 +68,18 @@
} \
} while (0)
+/**
+ * ASSERT_MEM_NE():
+ * Check that none of the first @_size bytes of @_seen are equal to @_expected.
+ * If false, print failed test message (if running with --verbose) and then
+ * assert.
+ */
+#define ASSERT_MEM_NE(_seen, _expected, _size) do { \
+ for (int _i = 0; _i < (_size); _i++) { \
+ ASSERT_NE((_seen)[_i], (_expected)); \
+ } \
+} while (0)
+
#define PREFIX_PUSH() prefix_push(__func__)
/*
@@ -116,4 +133,12 @@ static inline void run_bottom_up(int (*func)())
prefix_pop();
}
+static inline void verify_mem_content(void *mem, int size, int flags)
+{
+ if (flags & TEST_RAW)
+ ASSERT_MEM_NE((char *)mem, 0, size);
+ else
+ ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)mem, 0, size);
+}
+
#endif
--
2.25.1On 19.08.22 10:34, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> Update memblock_alloc() tests so that they test either memblock_alloc()
> or memblock_alloc_raw() depending on the value of alloc_test_flags. Run
> through all the existing tests in memblock_alloc_api twice: once for
> memblock_alloc() and once for memblock_alloc_raw().
>
> When the tests run memblock_alloc(), they test that the entire memory
> region is zero. When the tests run memblock_alloc_raw(), they test that
> the entire memory region is nonzero.
Could add a comment stating that we initialize the content to nonzero in
that case, and expect it to remain unchanged (== not zeroed).
>
> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c | 98 ++++++++++++++++--------
> tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 25 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> index 65bff77dd55b..cf67687ae044 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,29 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> #include "alloc_api.h"
>
> +static const char * const func_testing[] = {
> + "memblock_alloc",
> + "memblock_alloc_raw"
> +};
> +
> +static int alloc_test_flags = TEST_ZEROED;
> +
> +static inline const char * const get_func_testing(int flags)
> +{
> + if (flags & TEST_RAW)
> + return func_testing[1];
> + else
> + return func_testing[0];
No need for the else, you can return directly.
Can we avoid the func_testing array?
Persoally, I consider the "get_func_testing()" name a bit confusing.
get_memblock_alloc_name() ?
> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> index 58f84bf2c9ae..4fd3534ff955 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@
>
> #define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K
>
> +enum test_flags {
> + TEST_ZEROED = 0x0,
> + TEST_RAW = 0x1
> +};
I'd have called this
enum test_flags {
/* No special request. */
TEST_F_NONE = 0x0,
/* Perform raw allocations (no zeroing of memory).
TEST_F_RAW = 0x1,
};
Further, I'd just have use #define for the flags.
> +
> /**
> * ASSERT_EQ():
> * Check the condition
> @@ -63,6 +68,18 @@
> } \
> } while (0)
>
> +/**
> + * ASSERT_MEM_NE():
> + * Check that none of the first @_size bytes of @_seen are equal to @_expected.
> + * If false, print failed test message (if running with --verbose) and then
> + * assert.
> + */
> +#define ASSERT_MEM_NE(_seen, _expected, _size) do { \
> + for (int _i = 0; _i < (_size); _i++) { \
> + ASSERT_NE((_seen)[_i], (_expected)); \
> + } \
> +} while (0)
> +
> #define PREFIX_PUSH() prefix_push(__func__)
>
> /*
> @@ -116,4 +133,12 @@ static inline void run_bottom_up(int (*func)())
> prefix_pop();
> }
>
> +static inline void verify_mem_content(void *mem, int size, int flags)
nit: why use verify here when the other functions "assert". I'd have
called this something like "assert_mem_content()"
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 19.08.22 10:34, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> > Update memblock_alloc() tests so that they test either memblock_alloc()
> > or memblock_alloc_raw() depending on the value of alloc_test_flags. Run
> > through all the existing tests in memblock_alloc_api twice: once for
> > memblock_alloc() and once for memblock_alloc_raw().
> >
> > When the tests run memblock_alloc(), they test that the entire memory
> > region is zero. When the tests run memblock_alloc_raw(), they test that
> > the entire memory region is nonzero.
>
> Could add a comment stating that we initialize the content to nonzero in
> that case, and expect it to remain unchanged (== not zeroed).
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c | 98 ++++++++++++++++--------
> > tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 25 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> > index 65bff77dd55b..cf67687ae044 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,29 @@
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> > #include "alloc_api.h"
> >
> > +static const char * const func_testing[] = {
> > + "memblock_alloc",
> > + "memblock_alloc_raw"
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int alloc_test_flags = TEST_ZEROED;
> > +
> > +static inline const char * const get_func_testing(int flags)
> > +{
> > + if (flags & TEST_RAW)
> > + return func_testing[1];
> > + else
> > + return func_testing[0];
>
> No need for the else, you can return directly.
>
> Can we avoid the func_testing array?
>
>
> Persoally, I consider the "get_func_testing()" name a bit confusing.
>
> get_memblock_alloc_name() ?
>
>
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> > index 58f84bf2c9ae..4fd3534ff955 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
> > @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@
> >
> > #define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K
> >
> > +enum test_flags {
> > + TEST_ZEROED = 0x0,
> > + TEST_RAW = 0x1
> > +};
>
> I'd have called this
>
> enum test_flags {
> /* No special request. */
> TEST_F_NONE = 0x0,
> /* Perform raw allocations (no zeroing of memory).
> TEST_F_RAW = 0x1,
> };
>
> Further, I'd just have use #define for the flags.
>
Do you mean use two #defines instead of the enum? I thought enums were
preferred when defining related constants.
> > +
> > /**
> > * ASSERT_EQ():
> > * Check the condition
> > @@ -63,6 +68,18 @@
> > } \
> > } while (0)
> >
> > +/**
> > + * ASSERT_MEM_NE():
> > + * Check that none of the first @_size bytes of @_seen are equal to @_expected.
> > + * If false, print failed test message (if running with --verbose) and then
> > + * assert.
> > + */
> > +#define ASSERT_MEM_NE(_seen, _expected, _size) do { \
> > + for (int _i = 0; _i < (_size); _i++) { \
> > + ASSERT_NE((_seen)[_i], (_expected)); \
> > + } \
> > +} while (0)
> > +
> > #define PREFIX_PUSH() prefix_push(__func__)
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -116,4 +133,12 @@ static inline void run_bottom_up(int (*func)())
> > prefix_pop();
> > }
> >
> > +static inline void verify_mem_content(void *mem, int size, int flags)
>
> nit: why use verify here when the other functions "assert". I'd have
> called this something like "assert_mem_content()"
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
>
Thanks,
Rebecca
On 25.08.22 23:35, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 19.08.22 10:34, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
>>> Update memblock_alloc() tests so that they test either memblock_alloc()
>>> or memblock_alloc_raw() depending on the value of alloc_test_flags. Run
>>> through all the existing tests in memblock_alloc_api twice: once for
>>> memblock_alloc() and once for memblock_alloc_raw().
>>>
>>> When the tests run memblock_alloc(), they test that the entire memory
>>> region is zero. When the tests run memblock_alloc_raw(), they test that
>>> the entire memory region is nonzero.
>>
>> Could add a comment stating that we initialize the content to nonzero in
>> that case, and expect it to remain unchanged (== not zeroed).
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c | 98 ++++++++++++++++--------
>>> tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 25 ++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> index 65bff77dd55b..cf67687ae044 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> @@ -1,6 +1,29 @@
>>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>>> #include "alloc_api.h"
>>>
>>> +static const char * const func_testing[] = {
>>> + "memblock_alloc",
>>> + "memblock_alloc_raw"
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static int alloc_test_flags = TEST_ZEROED;
>>> +
>>> +static inline const char * const get_func_testing(int flags)
>>> +{
>>> + if (flags & TEST_RAW)
>>> + return func_testing[1];
>>> + else
>>> + return func_testing[0];
>>
>> No need for the else, you can return directly.
>>
>> Can we avoid the func_testing array?
>>
>>
>> Persoally, I consider the "get_func_testing()" name a bit confusing.
>>
>> get_memblock_alloc_name() ?
>>
>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> index 58f84bf2c9ae..4fd3534ff955 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@
>>>
>>> #define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K
>>>
>>> +enum test_flags {
>>> + TEST_ZEROED = 0x0,
>>> + TEST_RAW = 0x1
>>> +};
>>
>> I'd have called this
>>
>> enum test_flags {
>> /* No special request. */
>> TEST_F_NONE = 0x0,
>> /* Perform raw allocations (no zeroing of memory).
>> TEST_F_RAW = 0x1,
>> };
>>
>> Further, I'd just have use #define for the flags.
>>
> Do you mean use two #defines instead of the enum? I thought enums were
> preferred when defining related constants.
I guess we have a wild mixture of raw define, enums and __bitwise +
defines nowdays.
E.g., take a look at include/linux/rmap.h "typedef int __bitwise rmap_t"
and how it's used -- that seems to be the new "best" solution for use
in the kernel.
Having that said, feel free to just let it be an enum :)
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.