[PATCH v3 3/4] lib: tests: Add a test for sbi_bitmap

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 04:00:44PM +0000, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> Add test suite covering all of the functions from lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap.c:
> __bitmap_and, __bitmap_or and __bitmap_xor.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322 at gmail.com>
> ---
> V1 -> V2:
> - Extract the part of the commit description to the cover letter
> - Update to use the carray functionality instead of placing the pointer
> to the test suite directly into the sources
> - Fix codestyle issues
> - Use the references to the data_* arrays when defining the expected
> test results, instead of repeating the same numbers again and again
> V2 -> V3:
> - Use the SBIUNIT_END_CASE macro in the test cases list instead of '{}'
> - Remove redundant 'include' statement
> 
>  lib/sbi/objects.mk        |   3 ++
>  lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 105 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c
> 
> diff --git a/lib/sbi/objects.mk b/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> index 08959f1..b4c273f 100644
> --- a/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> +++ b/lib/sbi/objects.mk
> @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ libsbi-objs-y += riscv_locks.o
>  libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_test.o
>  libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_unit_tests.o
>  
> +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += sbi_bitmap_test.o
> +carray-sbi_unit_tests-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += bitmap_test_suite
> +
>  libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall.o
>  libsbi-objs-y += sbi_ecall_exts.o
>  
> diff --git a/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..2563934
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/sbi/sbi_bitmap_test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
> +/*
> + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause
> + *
> + * Author: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322 at gmail.com>
> + */
> +#include <sbi/sbi_bitmap.h>
> +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h>
> +
> +#define DATA_SIZE sizeof(data_zero)
> +#define DATA_BIT_SIZE (DATA_SIZE * 8)
> +
> +static u64 data_a[] = { 0xDEADBEEF, 0x00BAB10C, 0x1BADB002, 0xABADBABE };
> +static u64 data_b[] = { 0xC00010FF, 0x00BAB10C, 0xBAAAAAAD, 0xBADDCAFE };
> +static u64 data_zero[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0 };
> +
> +static void bitmap_and_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +	u64 res[DATA_SIZE];
> +	u64 a_and_b[] = { data_a[0] & data_b[0], data_a[1] & data_b[1],
> +			  data_a[2] & data_b[2], data_a[3] & data_b[3] };
> +
> +	__bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_and_b, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a & a = a */
> +	__bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_ASSERT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a & 0 = 0 */
> +	__bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* 0 & 0 = 0 */
> +	__bitmap_and(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +	/* Cover zero 'bits' argument */
> +	__bitmap_and(res, data_a, data_b, 0);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +}
> +
> +static void bitmap_or_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +	u64 res[DATA_SIZE];
> +	u64 a_or_b[] = { data_a[0] | data_b[0], data_a[1] | data_b[1],
> +			 data_a[2] | data_b[2], data_a[3] | data_b[3] };
> +
> +	__bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_or_b, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a | a = a */
> +	__bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a | 0 = a */
> +	__bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* 0 | 0 = 0 */
> +	__bitmap_or(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +	__bitmap_or(res, data_a, data_b, 0);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +}
> +
> +static void bitmap_xor_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +	u64 res[DATA_SIZE];
> +	u64 a_xor_b[] = { data_a[0] ^ data_b[0], data_a[1] ^ data_b[1],
> +			  data_a[2] ^ data_b[2], data_a[3] ^ data_b[3] };
> +
> +	__bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, a_xor_b, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a ^ 0 = a */
> +	__bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_a, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* a ^ a = 0 */
> +	__bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_a, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	/* 0 ^ 0 = 0 */
> +	__bitmap_xor(res, data_zero, data_zero, DATA_BIT_SIZE);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +
> +	sbi_memcpy(res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +	__bitmap_xor(res, data_a, data_b, 0);
> +	SBIUNIT_EXPECT_MEMEQ(test, res, data_zero, DATA_SIZE);
> +}
> +
> +static struct sbiunit_test_case bitmap_test_cases[] = {
> +	SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_and_test),
> +	SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_or_test),
> +	SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(bitmap_xor_test),
> +	SBIUNIT_END_CASE,
> +};
> +
> +SBIUNIT_TEST_SUITE(bitmap_test_suite, bitmap_test_cases);
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>

Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones at ventanamicro.com>