These names sound more general than they are.
The _end() function increments a `static int kunit_suite_counter`, so it
can only safely be called on suites, aka top-level subtests.
It would need to have a separate counter for each level of subtest to be
generic enough.
So rename it to make it clear it's only appropriate for suites.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
v1 -> v2: no change (see patch 2 and 4)
---
lib/kunit/test.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c
index 0f66c13d126e..64ee6a9d8003 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ size_t kunit_suite_num_test_cases(struct kunit_suite *suite)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_suite_num_test_cases);
-static void kunit_print_subtest_start(struct kunit_suite *suite)
+static void kunit_print_suite_start(struct kunit_suite *suite)
{
kunit_log(KERN_INFO, suite, KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "# Subtest: %s",
suite->name);
@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_suite_has_succeeded);
static size_t kunit_suite_counter = 1;
-static void kunit_print_subtest_end(struct kunit_suite *suite)
+static void kunit_print_suite_end(struct kunit_suite *suite)
{
kunit_print_ok_not_ok((void *)suite, false,
kunit_suite_has_succeeded(suite),
@@ -498,7 +498,7 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite)
struct kunit_result_stats suite_stats = { 0 };
struct kunit_result_stats total_stats = { 0 };
- kunit_print_subtest_start(suite);
+ kunit_print_suite_start(suite);
kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) {
struct kunit test = { .param_value = NULL, .param_index = 0 };
@@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite)
}
kunit_print_suite_stats(suite, suite_stats, total_stats);
- kunit_print_subtest_end(suite);
+ kunit_print_suite_end(suite);
return 0;
}
base-commit: 59729170afcd4900e08997a482467ffda8d88c7f
--
2.36.0.464.gb9c8b46e94-goog
