On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:47 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 4/2/21 3:35 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Before:
> >>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>> str == hello
> >>> "world" == world
> >>
> >> After:
> >>> Expected str == "world", but
> >>> str == "hello"
> >> <we don't need to tell the user that "world" == "world">
> >>
> >> Note: like the literal ellision for integers, this doesn't handle the
> >> case of
> >> KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "hello", "world")
> >> since we don't expect it to realistically happen in checked in tests.
> >> (If you really wanted a test to fail, KUNIT_FAIL("msg") exists)
> >>
> >> In that case, you'd get:
> >>> Expected "hello" == "world", but
> >> <output for next failure>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
>
> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
Are there some flags you'd like me to pass to checkpatch?
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --git HEAD
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked
Commit f66884e8b831 ("kunit: make KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ() quote values,
don't print literals") has no obvious style problems and is ready for
submission.
I just rebased onto linus/master again since I know checkpatch.pl's
default behavior had changed recently, but I didn't see any errors
there.
I know this commit made some lines go just over 80 characters, so
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --max-line-length=80 --git HEAD
...
total: 0 errors, 4 warnings, 42 lines checked
I can go and line wrap these but had figured they were more readable
this way if checkpatch.pl no longer complained by default.
Thanks,
Daniel
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
