| Message ID | 20210513193204.816681-9-davidgow@google.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,01/10] kunit: Do not typecheck binary assertions | expand |
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:36 PM David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote: > > With some of the stricter type checking in KUnit's EXPECT macros > removed, several casts in policy_unpack_test are no longer required. > > Remove the unnecessary casts, making the conditions clearer. > > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
On 5/13/21 12:32 PM, David Gow wrote: > With some of the stricter type checking in KUnit's EXPECT macros > removed, several casts in policy_unpack_test are no longer required. > > Remove the unnecessary casts, making the conditions clearer. > > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Acked-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com> I have pulled this into the apparmor tree > --- > This should be a no-op functionality wise, and while it depends on the > first couple of patches in this series, it's otherwise independent from > the others. I think this makes the test more readable, but if you > particularly dislike it, I'm happy to drop it. > > security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c > index 533137f45361..03f78a41ef79 100644 > --- a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c > +++ b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c > @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_array_out_of_bounds(struct kunit *test) > > array_size = unpack_array(puf->e, name); > > - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, (u16)0); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, 0); > KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, > puf->e->start + TEST_NAMED_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET); > } > @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_strdup_out_of_bounds(struct kunit *test) > size = unpack_strdup(puf->e, &string, TEST_STRING_NAME); > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, string, (char *)NULL); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, string, NULL); > KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, start); > } > > @@ -391,10 +391,10 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_basic(struct kunit *test) > > size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); > > - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, (void *)chunk, > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, > puf->e->start + TEST_U16_OFFSET + 2); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)TEST_U16_DATA); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, (void *)(chunk + TEST_U16_DATA)); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, TEST_U16_DATA); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, (chunk + TEST_U16_DATA)); > } > > static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_1( > @@ -408,8 +408,8 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_1( > > size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); > > - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)0); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, (char *)NULL); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, NULL); > KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, puf->e->end - 1); > } > > @@ -430,8 +430,8 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_2( > > size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); > > - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)0); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, (char *)NULL); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); > + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, NULL); > KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, puf->e->start + TEST_U16_OFFSET); > } > >
diff --git a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c index 533137f45361..03f78a41ef79 100644 --- a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c +++ b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_array_out_of_bounds(struct kunit *test) array_size = unpack_array(puf->e, name); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, (u16)0); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, 0); KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, puf->e->start + TEST_NAMED_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET); } @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_strdup_out_of_bounds(struct kunit *test) size = unpack_strdup(puf->e, &string, TEST_STRING_NAME); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, string, (char *)NULL); + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, string, NULL); KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, start); } @@ -391,10 +391,10 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_basic(struct kunit *test) size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, (void *)chunk, + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, puf->e->start + TEST_U16_OFFSET + 2); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)TEST_U16_DATA); - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, (void *)(chunk + TEST_U16_DATA)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, TEST_U16_DATA); + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, (chunk + TEST_U16_DATA)); } static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_1( @@ -408,8 +408,8 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_1( size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, (char *)NULL); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, NULL); KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, puf->e->end - 1); } @@ -430,8 +430,8 @@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_u16_chunk_out_of_bounds_2( size = unpack_u16_chunk(puf->e, &chunk); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, (size_t)0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, (char *)NULL); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, 0); + KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, chunk, NULL); KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, puf->e->start + TEST_U16_OFFSET); }
With some of the stricter type checking in KUnit's EXPECT macros removed, several casts in policy_unpack_test are no longer required. Remove the unnecessary casts, making the conditions clearer. Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> --- This should be a no-op functionality wise, and while it depends on the first couple of patches in this series, it's otherwise independent from the others. I think this makes the test more readable, but if you particularly dislike it, I'm happy to drop it. security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c | 18 +++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)