Hi Anatoly,
On 2023/7/19 20:09, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> On 7/10/2023 7:49 AM, Chengwen Feng wrote:
>> This patch supports rte_memarea_dump() API test.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng <fengcheng...@huawei.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdo...@huawei.com>
>> Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com>
>> ---
>> app/test/test_memarea.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/app/test/test_memarea.c b/app/test/test_memarea.c
>> index 4053cdcac9..6511a86699 100644
>> --- a/app/test/test_memarea.c
>> +++ b/app/test/test_memarea.c
>> @@ -320,6 +320,45 @@ test_memarea_alloc_free(void)
>> TEST_ASSERT(rte_errno == 0, "Expected Zero");
>> + fprintf(stderr, "There should have no allocated object.\n");
>> + rte_memarea_dump(ma, stderr, true);
>> +
>> + rte_memarea_destroy(ma);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +test_memarea_dump(void)
>> +{
>> + struct rte_memarea_param init;
>> + struct rte_memarea *ma;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + test_memarea_init_param(&init);
>> + init.source = RTE_MEMAREA_SOURCE_LIBC;
>> + init.total_sz = MEMAREA_TEST_DEFAULT_SIZE;
>> + ma = rte_memarea_create(&init);
>> + TEST_ASSERT(ma != NULL, "Expected Non-NULL");
>
> Here and in other places: I feel it's better to say *why* we expect non-NULL,
> or make the error message otherwise more meaningful, such as "Memarea
> creation failed".
It already fix in v19.
>
>> +
>> + /* test for invalid parameters */
>> + ret = rte_memarea_dump(NULL, stderr, false);
>> + TEST_ASSERT(ret == -1, "Expected -1");
>> + TEST_ASSERT(rte_errno == EINVAL, "Expected EINVAL");
>> + ret = rte_memarea_dump(ma, NULL, false);
>> + TEST_ASSERT(ret == -1, "Expected -1");
>> + TEST_ASSERT(rte_errno == EINVAL, "Expected EINVAL");
>> +
>> + /* test for dump */
>> + (void)rte_memarea_alloc(ma, 1);
>> + (void)rte_memarea_alloc(ma, 1);
>> + (void)rte_memarea_alloc(ma, 1);
>> + (void)rte_memarea_alloc(ma, MEMAREA_TEST_DEFAULT_SIZE);
>> + (void)rte_memarea_alloc(ma, MEMAREA_TEST_DEFAULT_SIZE);
>> + fprintf(stderr, "There should have three allocated object.\n");
>
> I question the value of this printout.
I have change the implemention (in v19): so it will depend on the
rte_memarea_alloc result.
>
>> + ret = rte_memarea_dump(ma, stderr, true);
>> + TEST_ASSERT(ret == 0, "Expected ZERO");
>> +
>> rte_memarea_destroy(ma);
>> return 0;
>> @@ -337,6 +376,7 @@ static struct unit_test_suite memarea_test_suite = {
>> TEST_CASE(test_memarea_alloc_fail),
>> TEST_CASE(test_memarea_free_fail),
>> TEST_CASE(test_memarea_alloc_free),
>> + TEST_CASE(test_memarea_dump),
>> TEST_CASES_END() /**< NULL terminate unit test array */
>> }
>
Thanks.
