On Tue, Sep 15 2015, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 15:55 +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> +static __init void test_string_get_size_one(u64 size, u64 blk_size,
>> + const enum
>> string_size_units units,
>> + const char *exp_result)
>> +{
>> + char buf[16];
>> +
>> + string_get_size(size, blk_size, units, buf, sizeof(buf));
>> + if (!memcmp(buf, exp_result, strnlen(exp_result, sizeof(buf)
>> - 1) + 1))
>
> Actually you don't need to do this +- 1. Either you will have '\0' or
> not, it will be checked by memcmp() anyway.
>
> Thus,
> memcmp(buf, exp_result, strnlen(exp_result, sizeof(buf))).
Huh? How does that ensure that string_get_size put a '\0' at the right
spot? We do need the comparison to also cover the terminating '\0' in
exp_result.
[It would be nice if we could assert at compile-time that
strlen(exp_result) < sizeof(buf).]
> Perhaps one line comment here
> /* Make sure that buf will be always NULL-terminated */
>
>> + buf[sizeof(buf) - 1] = '\0';
<bikeshed>Could we pretty-please use different names for 0 the pointer
and 0 the character, say in this case nul or NUL or '\0' or simply
0. Also, I don't see the value of the comment; that line is a totally
standard idiom.</bikeshed>.
>> + pr_warn("expected: %s, got %s\n", exp_result, buf);
>
> Here I recommend to use single quotes (just to see empty strings)
>
> …expected '%s', got '%s'…
Good idea.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
