| Message ID | 20210120214547.89770-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/5] lib/cmdline_kunit: add a new test case for get_options() | expand |
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:45 PM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Allow get_options() to take 0 as a number of integers parameter to validate > the input. > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > --- > lib/cmdline.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > lib/cmdline_kunit.c | 10 +++++++++- > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/cmdline.c b/lib/cmdline.c > index 2a9ae2143e42..1106a8bcd63e 100644 > --- a/lib/cmdline.c > +++ b/lib/cmdline.c > @@ -91,6 +91,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_option); > * full, or when no more numbers can be retrieved from the > * string. > * > + * When @nints is 0, the function just validates the given @str and > + * returns amount of parseable integers as described below. I'm not a native English speaker but it sounds like this should be "returns the amount". > + * > * Returns: > * > * The first element is filled by the amount of the collected numbers > @@ -103,15 +106,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_option); > > char *get_options(const char *str, int nints, int *ints) > { > + bool validate = nints == 0; bool validate = (nints == 0) would be clearer IMO. > int res, i = 1; > > - while (i < nints) { > - res = get_option((char **)&str, ints + i); > + while (i < nints || validate) { > + int *pint = validate ? ints : ints + i; > + > + res = get_option((char **)&str, pint); > if (res == 0) > break; > if (res == 3) { > + int n = validate ? 0 : nints - i; > int range_nums; > - range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, ints + i, nints - i); > + > + range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, pint, n); > if (range_nums < 0) > break; > /* > diff --git a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c > index 74da9ed61779..a6119c164b48 100644 > --- a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c > +++ b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c > @@ -109,15 +109,23 @@ static void cmdline_do_one_range_test(struct kunit *test, const char *in, > { > unsigned int i; > int r[16]; > + int *p; > > #define FMT "in test %u" > #define FMT2 "expected %d numbers, got %d" > #define FMT3 "at %d" > memset(r, 0, sizeof(r)); > get_options(in, ARRAY_SIZE(r), r); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " (parsed) " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); > for (i = 1; i < ARRAY_SIZE(r); i++) > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[i], e[i], FMT " " FMT3, n, i); > + > + memset(r, 0, sizeof(r)); > + get_options(in, 0, r); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " (validated) " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); > + > + p = memchr_inv(&r[1], 0, sizeof(r) - sizeof(r[0])); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, p, (int *)0, FMT " out of bound " FMT3, n, p - r); > #undef FMT3 > #undef FMT2 > #undef FMT Same as the other patch - just put the formatting strings into the messages. Bart > -- > 2.29.2 >
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 12:15:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:45 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: ... > > + * When @nints is 0, the function just validates the given @str and > > + * returns amount of parseable integers as described below. > > I'm not a native English speaker but it sounds like this should be > "returns the amount". Sounds reasonable. Fixed for v3. ... > > + bool validate = nints == 0; > > bool validate = (nints == 0) would be clearer IMO. I don't see the benefit, but I have changed. ... > Same as the other patch - just put the formatting strings into the messages. Okay, I changed. Thanks for review! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
diff --git a/lib/cmdline.c b/lib/cmdline.c index 2a9ae2143e42..1106a8bcd63e 100644 --- a/lib/cmdline.c +++ b/lib/cmdline.c @@ -91,6 +91,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_option); * full, or when no more numbers can be retrieved from the * string. * + * When @nints is 0, the function just validates the given @str and + * returns amount of parseable integers as described below. + * * Returns: * * The first element is filled by the amount of the collected numbers @@ -103,15 +106,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_option); char *get_options(const char *str, int nints, int *ints) { + bool validate = nints == 0; int res, i = 1; - while (i < nints) { - res = get_option((char **)&str, ints + i); + while (i < nints || validate) { + int *pint = validate ? ints : ints + i; + + res = get_option((char **)&str, pint); if (res == 0) break; if (res == 3) { + int n = validate ? 0 : nints - i; int range_nums; - range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, ints + i, nints - i); + + range_nums = get_range((char **)&str, pint, n); if (range_nums < 0) break; /* diff --git a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c index 74da9ed61779..a6119c164b48 100644 --- a/lib/cmdline_kunit.c +++ b/lib/cmdline_kunit.c @@ -109,15 +109,23 @@ static void cmdline_do_one_range_test(struct kunit *test, const char *in, { unsigned int i; int r[16]; + int *p; #define FMT "in test %u" #define FMT2 "expected %d numbers, got %d" #define FMT3 "at %d" memset(r, 0, sizeof(r)); get_options(in, ARRAY_SIZE(r), r); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " (parsed) " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); for (i = 1; i < ARRAY_SIZE(r); i++) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[i], e[i], FMT " " FMT3, n, i); + + memset(r, 0, sizeof(r)); + get_options(in, 0, r); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, r[0], e[0], FMT " (validated) " FMT2, n, e[0], r[0]); + + p = memchr_inv(&r[1], 0, sizeof(r) - sizeof(r[0])); + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, p, (int *)0, FMT " out of bound " FMT3, n, p - r); #undef FMT3 #undef FMT2 #undef FMT
Allow get_options() to take 0 as a number of integers parameter to validate the input. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> --- lib/cmdline.c | 14 +++++++++++--- lib/cmdline_kunit.c | 10 +++++++++- 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)