Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:45:26 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] iio: test: Add test for IIO_VAL_INT_64. | From | Andriy Tryshnivskyy <> |
| |
On 02.11.21 10:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. > Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:33 AM Andriy Tryshnivskyy > <andriy.tryshnivskyy@opensynergy.com> wrote: > Now it's good with format, but you have missed the commit message.
Actually commit massage contains a header only (no body message), but I can add body message too. Thanks!
> >> Signed-off-by: Andriy Tryshnivskyy <andriy.tryshnivskyy@opensynergy.com> > ... > >> +static void iio_test_iio_format_value_integer_64(struct kunit *test) >> +{ >> + char *buf = kunit_kmalloc(test, PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL); > Shouldn't this be checked against NULL?
Good question. Truly speaking I've made new test similar to other. And no other tests has a check for NULL.
>> + s64 value; >> + int values[2]; >> + int ret; > Reversed xmas tree ordering?
I will correct it. Thanks!
>> + value = 24; >> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); > ARRAY_SIZE()?
Will use ARRAY_SIZE(). Thanks!
>> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "24\n"); >> + >> + value = -24; >> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "-24\n"); >> + >> + value = 0; >> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "0\n"); >> + >> + value = 4294967295; > Is this UINT_MAX?
Yes. It's UINT_MAX. I will use a constant. Thanks!
>> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "4294967295\n"); >> + value = -4294967295; > Is this -UINT_MAX?
Yes. It's -UINT_MAX. I will use a constant. Thanks!
>> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "-4294967295\n"); >> + >> + value = LLONG_MAX; >> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "9223372036854775807\n"); >> + >> + value = LLONG_MIN; >> + values[0] = lower_32_bits(value); >> + values[1] = upper_32_bits(value); >> + ret = iio_format_value(buf, IIO_VAL_INT_64, 2, values); >> + IIO_TEST_FORMAT_EXPECT_EQ(test, buf, ret, "-9223372036854775808\n"); >> +} > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > Thank you for review!
Regards, Andriy.
| |