From: Artem Bityutskiy Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:23:06 +0000 (-0700) Subject: lib/list_sort: test: use generic random32 X-Git-Tag: v5.15~27649^2~24 X-Git-Url: https://git.proxmox.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=eeee9ebb54b76a33a13d2c926ffb018a4aea410f;p=mirror_ubuntu-kernels.git lib/list_sort: test: use generic random32 Instead of using own pseudo-random generator, use generic linux 'random32()' function. Presumably, this should improve test coverage. At the same time, do the following changes: o Use shorter macro name for test list length o Do not use strange 'l_h' name for 'struct list_head' element, use 'list', because it is traditional name and thus, makes the code more obvious and readable. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy Cc: Don Mullis Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- diff --git a/lib/list_sort.c b/lib/list_sort.c index 679b3a060e7e..8f3c24415ae5 100644 --- a/lib/list_sort.c +++ b/lib/list_sort.c @@ -142,42 +142,45 @@ void list_sort(void *priv, struct list_head *head, EXPORT_SYMBOL(list_sort); #ifdef CONFIG_TEST_LIST_SORT + +#include + struct debug_el { - struct list_head l_h; + struct list_head list; int value; unsigned serial; }; static int cmp(void *priv, struct list_head *a, struct list_head *b) { - return container_of(a, struct debug_el, l_h)->value - - container_of(b, struct debug_el, l_h)->value; + return container_of(a, struct debug_el, list)->value + - container_of(b, struct debug_el, list)->value; } /* * The pattern of set bits in the list length determines which cases * are hit in list_sort(). */ -#define LIST_SORT_TEST_LENGTH (512+128+2) /* not including head */ +#define TEST_LIST_LEN (512+128+2) /* not including head */ static int __init list_sort_test(void) { - int i, r = 1, count; + int i, count; struct list_head *head = kmalloc(sizeof(*head), GFP_KERNEL); struct list_head *cur; printk(KERN_DEBUG "testing list_sort()\n"); cur = head; - for (i = 0; i < LIST_SORT_TEST_LENGTH; i++) { + for (i = 0; i < TEST_LIST_LEN; i++) { struct debug_el *el = kmalloc(sizeof(*el), GFP_KERNEL); BUG_ON(!el); /* force some equivalencies */ - el->value = (r = (r * 725861) % 6599) % (LIST_SORT_TEST_LENGTH/3); + el->value = random32() % (TEST_LIST_LEN/3); el->serial = i; - el->l_h.prev = cur; - cur->next = &el->l_h; + el->list.prev = cur; + cur->next = &el->list; cur = cur->next; } head->prev = cur; @@ -186,7 +189,7 @@ static int __init list_sort_test(void) count = 1; for (cur = head->next; cur->next != head; cur = cur->next) { - struct debug_el *el = container_of(cur, struct debug_el, l_h); + struct debug_el *el = container_of(cur, struct debug_el, list); int cmp_result = cmp(NULL, cur, cur->next); if (cur->next->prev != cur) { printk(KERN_ERR "list_sort() returned " @@ -197,7 +200,7 @@ static int __init list_sort_test(void) return 1; } else if (cmp_result == 0 && el->serial >= container_of(cur->next, - struct debug_el, l_h)->serial) { + struct debug_el, list)->serial) { printk(KERN_ERR "list_sort() failed to preserve order " "of equivalent elements!\n"); return 1; @@ -206,7 +209,7 @@ static int __init list_sort_test(void) count++; } kfree(cur); - if (count != LIST_SORT_TEST_LENGTH) { + if (count != TEST_LIST_LEN) { printk(KERN_ERR "list_sort() returned list of " "different length!\n"); return 1;