On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:08 PM shuah <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 8/20/19 12:24 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 11:24:45AM -0600, shuah wrote: > >> On 8/13/19 11:50 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > >>> ## TL;DR > >>> > >>> This revision addresses comments from Stephen and Bjorn Helgaas. Most > >>> changes are pretty minor stuff that doesn't affect the API in anyway. > >>> One significant change, however, is that I added support for freeing > >>> kunit_resource managed resources before the test case is finished via > >>> kunit_resource_destroy(). Additionally, Bjorn pointed out that I broke > >>> KUnit on certain configurations (like the default one for x86, whoops). > >>> > >>> Based on Stephen's feedback on the previous change, I think we are > >>> pretty close. I am not expecting any significant changes from here on > >>> out. > >>> > >> > >> Hi Brendan, > >> > >> I found checkpatch errors in one or two patches. Can you fix those and > >> send v14. > > > > Hi Shuah, > > > > Are you refering to the following errors? > > > > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses > > #144: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:456: > > +#define KUNIT_BINARY_CLASS \ > > + kunit_binary_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_ASSERT_STRUCT > > > > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses > > #146: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:458: > > +#define KUNIT_BINARY_PTR_CLASS \ > > + kunit_binary_ptr_assert, KUNIT_INIT_BINARY_PTR_ASSERT_STRUCT > > > > These values should *not* be in parentheses. I am guessing checkpatch is > > getting confused and thinks that these are complex expressions, when > > they are not. > > > > I ignored the errors since I figured checkpatch was complaining > > erroneously. > > > > I could refactor the code to remove these macros entirely, but I think > > the code is cleaner with them. > > > > Please do. I am not veru sure what value these macros add. Alright, I will have something for you later today.
