| Message ID | 20240304214551.365057-4-ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | SBIUnit: cover OpenSBI with tests | expand |
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:15 AM Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> wrote: > > Add test suite covering all of the functions from lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap.c: > __bitmap_and, __bitmap_or and __bitmap_xor. > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> This sbi_bitmap_test.c fails to compile for RV32 due the "u64" variables. I have fixed this at the time of merging this patch. Applied this patch to the riscv/opensb repo. Thanks, Anup > --- > V1 -> V2: > - Extract the part of the commit description to the cover letter > - Update to use the carray functionality instead of placing the pointer > to the test suite directly into the sources > - Fix codestyle issues > - Use the references to the data_* arrays when defining the expected > test results, instead of repeating the same numbers again and again > V2 -> V3: > - Use the SBIUNIT_END_CASE macro in the test cases list instead of '{}' > - Remove redundant 'include' statement > V3 -> V4: > - No changes > > lib/sbi/objects.mk | 3 ++ > lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 105 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/objects.mk b/lib/sbi/objects.mk > index 08959f1..b4c273f 100644 > --- a/lib/sbi/objects.mk > +++ b/lib/sbi/objects.mk > @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ libsbi-objs-y += riscv_locks.o > libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_test.o > libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_tests.o > > +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_bitmap_test.o > +carray-sbi_unit_tests-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += bitmap_test_suite > + > libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall.o > libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall_exts.o > > diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..2563934 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c > @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ > +/* > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause > + * > + * Author: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> > + */ > +#include <sbi/sbi_bitmap.h> > +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h> > + > +#define DATA_SIZE sizeof(data_zero) > +#define DATA_BIT_SIZE (DATA_SIZE * 8) > + > +static u64 data_a[] = { 0xDEADBEEF, 0x00BAB10C, 0x1BADB002, 0xABADBABE }; > +static u64 data_b[] = { 0xC00010FF, 0x00BAB10C, 0xBAAAAAAD, 0xBADDCAFE }; > +static u64 data_zero[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0 }; > + > +static void bitmap_and_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) > +{ > + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; > + u64 a_and_b[] = { data_a[0] & data_b[0], data_a[1] & data_b[1], > + data_a[2] & data_b[2], data_a[3] & data_b[3] }; > + > + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_and_b, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a & a = a */ > + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_ASSERT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a & 0 = 0 */ > + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* 0 & 0 = 0 */ > + __bitmap_and(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + > + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + /* Cover zero 'bits' argument */ > + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, 0); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > +} > + > +static void bitmap_or_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) > +{ > + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; > + u64 a_or_b[] = { data_a[0] | data_b[0], data_a[1] | data_b[1], > + data_a[2] | data_b[2], data_a[3] | data_b[3] }; > + > + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_or_b, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a | a = a */ > + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a | 0 = a */ > + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* 0 | 0 = 0 */ > + __bitmap_or(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + > + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, 0); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > +} > + > +static void bitmap_xor_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) > +{ > + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; > + u64 a_xor_b[] = { data_a[0] ^ data_b[0], data_a[1] ^ data_b[1], > + data_a[2] ^ data_b[2], data_a[3] ^ data_b[3] }; > + > + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_xor_b, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a ^ 0 = a */ > + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* a ^ a = 0 */ > + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + > + /* 0 ^ 0 = 0 */ > + __bitmap_xor(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + > + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, 0); > + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); > +} > + > +static struct sbiunit_test_case bitmap_test_cases[] = { > + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_and_test), > + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_or_test), > + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_xor_test), > + SBIUNIT_END_CASE, > +}; > + > +SBIUNIT_TEST_SUITE(bitmap_test_suite, bitmap_test_cases); > -- > 2.34.1 >
On 3/10/24 04:50, Anup Patel wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:15 AM Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Add test suite covering all of the functions from lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap.c: >> __bitmap_and, __bitmap_or and __bitmap_xor. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> >> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> > > This sbi_bitmap_test.c fails to compile for RV32 due the "u64" > variables. I have fixed this at the time of merging this patch. > > Applied this patch to the riscv/opensb repo. > Thank you for fixing this error, I'll try to set up the proper test tooling/infrastructure to avoid such mistakes in the future. Actually, I was thinking about a python script for the test automation, similar to what we have in the Linux Kernel for KUnit. For instance, it could run the tests for the multiple XLENs and extension sets and report results in a nice format.
diff --git a/lib/sbi/objects.mk b/lib/sbi/objects.mk index 08959f1..b4c273f 100644 --- a/lib/sbi/objects.mk +++ b/lib/sbi/objects.mk @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ libsbi-objs-y += riscv_locks.o libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_test.o libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_tests.o +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_bitmap_test.o +carray-sbi_unit_tests-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += bitmap_test_suite + libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall.o libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall_exts.o diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2563934 --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +/* + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause + * + * Author: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@gmail.com> + */ +#include <sbi/sbi_bitmap.h> +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h> + +#define DATA_SIZE sizeof(data_zero) +#define DATA_BIT_SIZE (DATA_SIZE * 8) + +static u64 data_a[] = { 0xDEADBEEF, 0x00BAB10C, 0x1BADB002, 0xABADBABE }; +static u64 data_b[] = { 0xC00010FF, 0x00BAB10C, 0xBAAAAAAD, 0xBADDCAFE }; +static u64 data_zero[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0 }; + +static void bitmap_and_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) +{ + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; + u64 a_and_b[] = { data_a[0] & data_b[0], data_a[1] & data_b[1], + data_a[2] & data_b[2], data_a[3] & data_b[3] }; + + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_and_b, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a & a = a */ + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_ASSERT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a & 0 = 0 */ + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + + /* 0 & 0 = 0 */ + __bitmap_and(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + /* Cover zero 'bits' argument */ + __bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, 0); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); +} + +static void bitmap_or_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) +{ + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; + u64 a_or_b[] = { data_a[0] | data_b[0], data_a[1] | data_b[1], + data_a[2] | data_b[2], data_a[3] | data_b[3] }; + + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_or_b, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a | a = a */ + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a | 0 = a */ + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); + + /* 0 | 0 = 0 */ + __bitmap_or(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + __bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, 0); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); +} + +static void bitmap_xor_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test) +{ + u64 res[DATA_SIZE]; + u64 a_xor_b[] = { data_a[0] ^ data_b[0], data_a[1] ^ data_b[1], + data_a[2] ^ data_b[2], data_a[3] ^ data_b[3] }; + + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_xor_b, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a ^ 0 = a */ + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE); + + /* a ^ a = 0 */ + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + + /* 0 ^ 0 = 0 */ + __bitmap_xor(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + + sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); + __bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, 0); + SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE); +} + +static struct sbiunit_test_case bitmap_test_cases[] = { + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_and_test), + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_or_test), + SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_xor_test), + SBIUNIT_END_CASE, +}; + +SBIUNIT_TEST_SUITE(bitmap_test_suite, bitmap_test_cases);