[PATCH 2/3] lib: tests: Add test for atomic_t

[Anup Patel]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 9:23 PM Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Implement the test which covers some of the functions from the
> `riscv_atomic.h` header file. The test contains 9 test cases:
>
> 1) atomic read/write test
> 2) add/return test
> 3) sub/return test
> 4) cmpxchg test
> 5) atomic_xchg test
> 6) atomic_raw_set_bit test
> 7) atomic_raw_clear_bit test
> 8) atomic_set_bit test
> 9) atomic_clear_bit test
>
> Some of the test cases operate on the `test_atomic` variable. It gets
> initialized in the suite init function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322 at gmail.com>

LGTM.

Reviewed-by: Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org>

Applied this patch to the riscv/opensbi repo.

Thanks,
Anup

> ---
>  lib/sbi/tests/objects.mk          |   3 +
>  lib/sbi/tests/riscv_atomic_test.c | 143 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 146 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 lib/sbi/tests/riscv_atomic_test.c
>
> diff --git a/lib/sbi/tests/objects.mk b/lib/sbi/tests/objects.mk
> index 5ce188a..ba588dc 100644
> --- a/lib/sbi/tests/objects.mk
> +++ b/lib/sbi/tests/objects.mk
> @@ -6,3 +6,6 @@ libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += tests/sbi_bitmap_test.o
>
>  carray-sbi_unit_tests-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += console_test_suite
>  libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += tests/sbi_console_test.o
> +
> +carray-sbi_unit_tests-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += atomic_test_suite
> +libsbi-objs-$(CONFIG_SBIUNIT) += tests/riscv_atomic_test.o
> diff --git a/lib/sbi/tests/riscv_atomic_test.c b/lib/sbi/tests/riscv_atomic_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..8a17a5f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/sbi/tests/riscv_atomic_test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
> +#include <sbi/sbi_unit_test.h>
> +#include <sbi/riscv_atomic.h>
> +#include <sbi/sbi_bitops.h>
> +
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1 239l
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2 30l
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_VAL3 2024l
> +
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM 3
> +
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL 1
> +#define ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM 15
> +
> +static atomic_t test_atomic;
> +
> +static void atomic_test_suite_init(void)
> +{
> +       ATOMIC_INIT(&test_atomic, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_rw_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       /* We should read the same value as we've written */
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       /* Negative value should also work */
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, -ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), -ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +}
> +
> +static void add_return_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_add_return(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2),
> +                         ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1 + ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +       /* The atomic value should be updated as well */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1 + ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +}
> +
> +static void sub_return_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_sub_return(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2),
> +                         ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1 - ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1 - ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +}
> +
> +static void cmpxchg_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       /* if current value != expected, it stays the same */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_cmpxchg(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL3),
> +                         ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       /* if current value == expected, it gets updated */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_cmpxchg(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2),
> +                         ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_xchg_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_xchg(&test_atomic, ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), ATOMIC_TEST_VAL2);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_raw_set_bit_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       unsigned long data[] = {0, 0, 0};
> +       /* the bitpos points to the bit of one of the elements of the `data` array */
> +       size_t bitpos = ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL * BITS_PER_LONG + ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM;
> +
> +       /* check if the bit we set actually gets set */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_raw_set_bit(bitpos, data), 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL], 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM);
> +
> +       /* Other elements of the `data` array should stay untouched */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[0], 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[2], 0);
> +
> +       /* check that if we set the bit twice it stays set */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_raw_set_bit(bitpos, data), 1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL], 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_raw_clear_bit_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       unsigned long data[] = {~1UL, 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM, ~1UL};
> +       /* the bitpos points to the bit of one of the elements of the `data` array */
> +       size_t bitpos = ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL * BITS_PER_LONG + ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_NUM;
> +
> +       /* check if the bit we clear actually gets cleared */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_raw_clear_bit(bitpos, data), 1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL], 0);
> +
> +       /* Other elements of the `data` array should stay untouched */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[0], ~1UL);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[2], ~1UL);
> +
> +       /* check that if we clear the bit twice it stays cleared */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_raw_clear_bit(bitpos, data), 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, data[ATOMIC_TEST_RAW_BIT_CELL], 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_set_bit_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_set_bit(ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM, &test_atomic), 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM);
> +       /* If we set the bit twice, it stays 1 */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_set_bit(ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM, &test_atomic), 1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM);
> +}
> +
> +static void atomic_clear_bit_test(struct sbiunit_test_case *test)
> +{
> +       atomic_write(&test_atomic, 1 << ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_clear_bit(ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM, &test_atomic), 1);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), 0);
> +       /* if we clear the bit twice, it stays 0 */
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_clear_bit(ATOMIC_TEST_BIT_NUM, &test_atomic), 0);
> +       SBIUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, atomic_read(&test_atomic), 0);
> +}
> +
> +static struct sbiunit_test_case atomic_test_cases[] = {
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_rw_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(add_return_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(sub_return_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(cmpxchg_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_xchg_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_raw_set_bit_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_raw_clear_bit_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_set_bit_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_TEST_CASE(atomic_clear_bit_test),
> +       SBIUNIT_END_CASE,
> +};
> +
> +const struct sbiunit_test_suite atomic_test_suite = {
> +       .name = "atomic_test_suite",
> +       .cases = atomic_test_cases,
> +       .init = atomic_test_suite_init
> +};
> --
> 2.34.1
>