On 11/7/2019 4:53 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 03:52:12PM +0800, Tao Xu wrote:
Add tests for time input such as zero, around limit of precision,
signed upper limit, actual upper limit, beyond limits, time suffixes,
and etc.

Signed-off-by: Tao Xu <tao3...@intel.com>
---
[...]
+    /* Close to signed upper limit 0x7ffffffffffffc00 (53 msbs set) */
+    qdict = keyval_parse("time1=9223372036854774784," /* 7ffffffffffffc00 */
+                         "time2=9223372036854775295", /* 7ffffffffffffdff */
+                         NULL, &error_abort);
+    v = qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval(QOBJECT(qdict));
+    qobject_unref(qdict);
+    visit_start_struct(v, NULL, NULL, 0, &error_abort);
+    visit_type_time(v, "time1", &time, &error_abort);
+    g_assert_cmphex(time, ==, 0x7ffffffffffffc00);
+    visit_type_time(v, "time2", &time, &error_abort);
+    g_assert_cmphex(time, ==, 0x7ffffffffffffc00);

I'm confused by this test case and the one below[1].  Are these
known bugs?  Shouldn't we document them as known bugs?

Because do_strtosz() or do_strtomul() actually parse with strtod(), so the precision is 53 bits, so in these cases, 7ffffffffffffdff and fffffffffffffbff are rounded.

+    visit_check_struct(v, &error_abort);
+    visit_end_struct(v, NULL);
+    visit_free(v);
+
+    /* Close to actual upper limit 0xfffffffffffff800 (53 msbs set) */
+    qdict = keyval_parse("time1=18446744073709549568," /* fffffffffffff800 */
+                         "time2=18446744073709550591", /* fffffffffffffbff */
+                         NULL, &error_abort);
+    v = qobject_input_visitor_new_keyval(QOBJECT(qdict));
+    qobject_unref(qdict);
+    visit_start_struct(v, NULL, NULL, 0, &error_abort);
+    visit_type_time(v, "time1", &time, &error_abort);
+    g_assert_cmphex(time, ==, 0xfffffffffffff800);
+    visit_type_time(v, "time2", &time, &error_abort);
+    g_assert_cmphex(time, ==, 0xfffffffffffff800);

[1]

+    visit_check_struct(v, &error_abort);
+    visit_end_struct(v, NULL);
+    visit_free(v);
[...]



Reply via email to