Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v2 1/2] test: cleanup tests code

["Alexander Tikhonov" <avtikhon@tarantool.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5078 bytes --]


Hi Igor, thanks for your comments, I’ve used all of them in the code.

  
>Пятница, 28 февраля 2020, 21:42 +03:00 от Igor Munkin <imun@tarantool.org>:
> 
>Sasha,
>
>Thanks for the patch. I left some comments below, please consider them.
>
>On 27.02.20, Alexander V. Tikhonov wrote:
>> Cleaned up the tests code:
>> - added local definitions for the variables
>> - added os.exit() routine at the tests finish
>> - changed added information messages to test:ok() calls
>
>I propose to reword the commit message the following way:
>| test: cleanup tests code
>|
>| Cleaned up the tests code according to the Lua style guide:
>| - made scoped variables local
>| - added os.exit call at the end of the test chunk
>| - adjusted the messages in test:ok calls
>
>General comment: please adjust the test names regarding the changes I
>proposed in the second patch.
Ok.
>
>>
>> Part of #4655
>> ---
>> test/fix_string_find_recording.test.lua | 6 +++---
>> test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_505.test.lua | 7 ++++---
>> test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_524.test.lua | 4 ++--
>> test/gh.test.lua | 8 ++++----
>> test/pairsmm_tarantool_4560.test.lua | 8 +++++---
>> test/table_chain_bug_LuaJIT_494.test.lua | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
>> test/unsink_64_kptr.test.lua | 7 ++++---
>> 7 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>
><snipped>
>
>> diff --git a/test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_505.test.lua b/test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_505.test.lua
>> index 2fee069..3b7d7df 100755
>> --- a/test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_505.test.lua
>> +++ b/test/fold_bug_LuaJIT_505.test.lua
>> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
>> #!/usr/bin/env tarantool
>>
>> -tap = require('tap')
>> +local tap = require('tap')
>>
>> -test = tap.test("505")
>> +local test = tap.test("lj-505-fold-icorrect-behavior")
>> test:plan(1)
>>
>> -- Test file to demonstrate Lua fold machinery icorrect behavior, details:
>> @@ -16,5 +16,6 @@ for _ = 1, 20 do
>> local pos_b = string.find(value2, "b", 2, true)
>> assert(pos_b == 2, "FAIL: position of 'b' is " .. pos_b)
>> end
>> +test:ok(true, "LuaJIT/LuaJIT gh-505 assert not occured")
>
>Message is absolutely non-informative. I propose to reword it:
>| "string.find offset aritmetics wasn't broken while recording"
Done.
>>
>> -test:ok("PASS")
>> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
>
><snipped>
>
>> diff --git a/test/table_chain_bug_LuaJIT_494.test.lua b/test/table_chain_bug_LuaJIT_494.test.lua
>> index 06c0f0d..3007360 100755
>> --- a/test/table_chain_bug_LuaJIT_494.test.lua
>> +++ b/test/table_chain_bug_LuaJIT_494.test.lua
>> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
>> #!/usr/bin/env tarantool
>>
>> -tap = require('tap')
>> +local tap = require('tap')
>>
>> -test = tap.test("494")
>> +local test = tap.test("lj-494-table-chain-infinite-loop")
>> test:plan(1)
>>
>> -- Test file to demonstrate Lua table hash chain bugs discussed in
>> @@ -11,19 +11,19 @@ test:plan(1)
>> --  https://gist.github.com/corsix/1fc9b13a2dd5f3659417b62dd54d4500
>>
>> --- Plumbing
>> -ffi = require"ffi"
>> -ffi.cdef"char* strstr(const char*, const char*)"
>> -strstr = ffi.C.strstr
>> -cast = ffi.cast
>> -str_hash_offset = cast("uint32_t*", strstr("*", ""))[-2] == 1 and 3 or 2
>> +local ffi = require("ffi")
>> +ffi.cdef("char* strstr(const char*, const char*)")
>> +local strstr = ffi.C.strstr
>> +local cast = ffi.cast
>> +local str_hash_offset = cast("uint32_t*", strstr("*", ""))[-2] == 1 and 3 or 2
>> function str_hash(s)
>> return cast("uint32_t*", strstr(s, "")) - str_hash_offset
>> end
>> -table_new = require"table.new"
>> +local table_new = require("table.new")
>>
>> --- Prepare some objects
>> -victims = {}
>> -orig_hash = {}
>> +local victims = {}
>> +local orig_hash = {}
>> for c in ("abcdef"):gmatch"." do
>> v = c .. "{09add58a-13a4-44e0-a52c-d44d0f9b2b95}"
>> victims[c] = v
>> @@ -174,5 +174,6 @@ collectgarbage()
>> for c, v in pairs(victims) do
>> str_hash(v)[0] = orig_hash[c]
>> end
>> +test:ok(true, "LuaJIT/LuaJIT gh-494 successfully checked commit a7dc9e8d23315217c9fe0029bc8ae12c03306b33")
>
>Message is absolutely non-informative. I propose to reword it:
>| "table keys collisions are resolved properly (no assertions failed)"
Done.
>>
>> -test:ok("PASS")
>> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
>> diff --git a/test/unsink_64_kptr.test.lua b/test/unsink_64_kptr.test.lua
>> index  8995763 ..a618fd2 100755
>> --- a/test/unsink_64_kptr.test.lua
>> +++ b/test/unsink_64_kptr.test.lua
>> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
>> #!/usr/bin/env tarantool
>>
>> -tap = require('tap')
>> +local tap = require('tap')
>>
>> -test = tap.test("232")
>> +local test = tap.test("or-232-unsink-64-kptr")
>> test:plan(1)
>>
>> --- From: Thibault Charbonnier < thibaultcha@me.com >
>> @@ -40,5 +40,6 @@ end
>> for i = 1, 1000 do
>> fn(i)
>> end
>> +test:ok(true, "openresty-lua/resty-core gh-232 allowed its address to be inlined")
>
>Here is a mess with a message, it totally doesn't describe the check
>being made. I propose the following comment:
>| "allocation is unsunk at the trace exit (no platform failures)"
Done.
>>
>> -test:ok("PASS")
>> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
>
>--
>Best regards,
>IM 
 
 
--
Alexander Tikhonov
 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7117 bytes --]