On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 03:31:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >On Mon, 25 May 2020 21:57:41 +0000 Wei Yang <richard.weiy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I see the patch just merged, so I suppose to add the above test code into >> that >> one? > >Well, that's not really test code. > >But yes, something which tests both the 32-bit and 64-bit functions would be >nice, sometime.
Mimic the test_bitops.c, I wrote a test like this: /* a tiny module only meant to test get_count_order/long */ unsigned int order_comb[][2] = { {0x00000003, 2}, {0x00000004, 2}, {0x00001fff, 13}, {0x00002000, 13}, {0x50000000, 32}, {0x80000000, 32}, }; static int __init test_getorder_startup(void) { int i; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(order_comb); i++) { if (order_comb[i][1] != get_count_order(order_comb[i][0])) pr_warn("get_count_order wrong for %lx\n", order_comb[i][0]); } return 0; } Since I don't get a way to iterate all the possibilities, some random combination is chosen. Is this one looks good? -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me