On Mon, 2024-06-03 at 16:53 +0100, Cupertino Miranda wrote:
I think this macro is a long overdue, thank you for working on this.
A few notes below.
[...]
> +static int push_regex(const char *regex_str, struct test_subspec *subspec)
> +{
> + void *tmp;
> + int regcomp_res;
> +
> + tmp = realloc(subspec->expect,
> + (1 + subspec->expect_msg_cnt) * sizeof(struct expect_msg));
> + if (!tmp) {
> + ASSERT_FAIL("failed to realloc memory for messages\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> + subspec->expect = tmp;
> +
> + subspec->expect[subspec->expect_msg_cnt].regex = (regex_t *) malloc(sizeof(regex_t));
> + regcomp_res = regcomp (subspec->expect[subspec->expect_msg_cnt].regex,
> + regex_str, REG_EXTENDED|REG_NEWLINE);
> + if (regcomp_res != 0) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "Regexp: '%s'\n", regex_str);
> + ASSERT_FAIL("failed to compile regex\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
Maybe also use a regerror() function that could be used to print
what's wrong with the regex.
Also, there is a ctx_rewrite.c:compile_regex, it might be interesting
to extract in from ctx_rewrite.c to testing_helpers.c and use it here.
> +
> + subspec->expect[subspec->expect_msg_cnt].msg = regex_str;
> + subspec->expect_msg_cnt += 1;
> return 0;
> }
[...]
> @@ -403,26 +453,44 @@ static void validate_case(struct test_loader *tester,
> int load_err)
> {
> int i, j;
> + const char *match;
>
> for (i = 0; i < subspec->expect_msg_cnt; i++) {
> - char *match;
> const char *expect_msg;
> + regex_t *regex;
> + regmatch_t reg_match[1];
> +
> + expect_msg = subspec->expect[i].msg;
> + regex = subspec->expect[i].regex;
> +
> + if (regex == NULL) {
> + match = strstr(tester->log_buf + tester->next_match_pos, expect_msg);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR (match, "expect_msg")) {
> + /* if we are in verbose mode, we've already emitted log */
> + if (env.verbosity == VERBOSE_NONE)
> + emit_verifier_log(tester->log_buf, true /*force*/);
> + for (j = 0; j < i; j++)
> + fprintf(stderr,
> + "MATCHED MSG: '%s'\n", subspec->expect[j].msg);
> + fprintf(stderr, "EXPECTED MSG: '%s'\n", expect_msg);
> + return;
> + }
> + tester->next_match_pos = match - tester->log_buf + strlen(expect_msg);
> + } else {
> + int match_size = regexec (regex, tester->log_buf + tester->next_match_pos, 1, reg_match, 0);
^
Nit: |
I think scripts/checkpatch.pl complains about such spaces
[...]
There is no regfree() call in the patch-set,
could you please extend free_test_spec()?
