On 22/03/23 11:26, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 11:06:57AM -0300, Arthur Grillo wrote:
>> Insert test for the drm_rect_intersect() function, it also create a
>> helper for comparing drm_rects more easily.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arthur Grillo <arthurgrillo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_rect_test.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_rect_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_rect_test.c
>> index e9809ea32696..f700984f70a8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_rect_test.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_rect_test.c
>> @@ -9,6 +9,15 @@
>>
>> #include <drm/drm_rect.h>
>>
>> +static void drm_rect_compare(struct kunit *test, const struct drm_rect *r,
>> + const struct drm_rect *expected)
>> +{
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, r->x1, expected->x1);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, r->y1, expected->y1);
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, drm_rect_width(r), drm_rect_width(expected));
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, drm_rect_height(r), drm_rect_height(expected));
>> +}
>
> We already have a drm_rect_equals().
>
I knew about drm_rect_equals(), but it only returns a boolean value, I
thought that it would be better to test each attribute independently
to find errors easily in the tested functions.
>> +
>> static void drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_div_by_zero(struct kunit *test)
>> {
>> struct drm_rect src, dst, clip;
>> @@ -196,11 +205,32 @@ static void drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_signed_vs_unsigned(struct kunit *test)
>> KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE_MSG(test, drm_rect_visible(&src), "Source should not be visible\n");
>> }
>>
>> +static void drm_test_rect_intersect(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> + struct drm_rect r1, r2;
>> + bool visible;
>> +
>> + drm_rect_init(&r1, 0, 0, 2, 2);
>> + drm_rect_init(&r2, 1, 1, 2, 2);
>> +
>> + visible = drm_rect_intersect(&r1, &r2);
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE_MSG(test, visible, "Interserction should be a visible rect");
>> + drm_rect_compare(test, &r1, &DRM_RECT_INIT(1, 1, 1, 1));
>> +
>> + drm_rect_init(&r1, 0, 0, 1, 1);
>> +
>
> I would re-init r2 here too to make it easier to see what we're
> actually testing.
Great idea.
>
> I would probably test a few more variations of the overlap between
> the rectangles, eg: equal rectangles, one smaller one fully inside
> the bigger one, overlaps across different edges/corners.
>
Okay, I will make more tests for this function.
>> + visible = drm_rect_intersect(&r1, &r2);
>> +
>> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE_MSG(test, visible, "Interserction should not be a visible rect");
>> +}
>> +
>> static struct kunit_case drm_rect_tests[] = {
>> KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_div_by_zero),
>> KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_not_clipped),
>> KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_clipped),
>> KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_rect_clip_scaled_signed_vs_unsigned),
>> + KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_rect_intersect),
>> { }
>> };
>>
>> --
>> 2.39.2
>
Thank you for your review!
Regards,
~Arthur Grillo
