On 2023-08-29 at 16:04:29 +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Aug 2023, Maciej Wieczór-Retman wrote:
>> On 2023-08-23 at 16:15:56 +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>> >Benchmark argument is handled by custom argument parsing code which is
>> >more complicated than it needs to be.
>> >
>> >Process benchmark argument within the normal getopt() handling and drop
>> >entirely unnecessary ben_ind and has_ben variables. If -b is not given,
>> >setup the default benchmark command right after the switch statement
>> >and make -b to goto over it while it terminates the getopt() loop.
>> >
>> >Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Reviewed-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >---
>> > .../testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c | 71 ++++++++++---------
>> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>> >
>> >diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
>> >index 94516d1f4307..ae9001ef7b0a 100644
>> >--- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
>> >+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c
>> >@@ -169,28 +169,35 @@ static void run_cat_test(int cpu_no, int no_of_bits)
>> >
>> > int main(int argc, char **argv)
>> > {
>> >- bool has_ben = false, mbm_test = true, mba_test = true, cmt_test = true;
>> >- int c, cpu_no = 1, argc_new = argc, i, no_of_bits = 0;
>> >+ bool mbm_test = true, mba_test = true, cmt_test = true;
>> >+ int c, cpu_no = 1, i, no_of_bits = 0;
>> > const char *benchmark_cmd[BENCHMARK_ARGS];
>> >- int ben_ind, tests = 0;
>> > char *span_str = NULL;
>> > bool cat_test = true;
>> > char *skip_reason;
>> >+ int tests = 0;
>> > int ret;
>> >
>> >- for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) {
>> >- if (strcmp(argv[i], "-b") == 0) {
>> >- ben_ind = i + 1;
>> >- argc_new = ben_ind - 1;
>> >- has_ben = true;
>> >- break;
>> >- }
>> >- }
>> >-
>> >- while ((c = getopt(argc_new, argv, "ht:b:n:p:")) != -1) {
>> >+ while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "ht:b:n:p:")) != -1) {
>> > char *token;
>> >
>> > switch (c) {
>> >+ case 'b':
>> >+ /*
>> >+ * First move optind back to the (first) optarg and
>> >+ * then build the benchmark command using the
>> >+ * remaining arguments.
>> >+ */
>> >+ optind--;
>> >+ if (argc - optind >= BENCHMARK_ARGS - 1)
>> >+ ksft_exit_fail_msg("Too long benchmark command");
>>
>> Isn't this condition off by two?
>>
>> I did some testing and the maximum amount of benchmark arguments is 62
>> while the array of const char* has 64 spaces. Is it supposed to have
>> less than the maximum capacity?
>>
>> Wouldn't something like this be more valid with BENCHMARK_ARGS equal to
>> 64? :
>> if (argc - optind > BENCHMARK_ARGS)
>
>Certainly not off by two as the array must be NULL terminated but it seems
>to be off-by-one (to the safe direction), yes.
Sorry, yes, off by one, now I can see the NULL just after the loop.
--
Kind regards
Maciej Wieczór-Retman
