[PATCH] acpi: method: refactor some of the passed messages
Keng-Yu Lin
kengyu at canonical.com
Wed Jan 23 07:07:50 UTC 2013
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Colin King <colin.king at canonical.com> wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king at canonical.com>
>
> We're using some common test passed messaged in a lot of the
> method tests, so add some helper functions and refactor the code
> a bit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king at canonical.com>
> ---
> src/acpi/method/method.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/acpi/method/method.c b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> index f8330a7..170edb5 100644
> --- a/src/acpi/method/method.c
> +++ b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> @@ -273,6 +273,31 @@ typedef void (*method_test_return)(fwts_framework *fw, char *name,
> /****************************************************************************/
>
> /*
> + * method_passed_sane()
> + * helper function to report often used passed messages
> + */
> +static void method_passed_sane(
> + fwts_framework *fw,
> + const char *name,
> + const char *type)
> +{
> + fwts_passed(fw, "%s correctly returned a sane looking %s.", name, type);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * method_passed_sane_uint64()
> + * helper function to report often used passed uint64 values
> + */
> +static void method_passed_sane_uint64(
> + fwts_framework *fw,
> + const char *name,
> + const uint64_t value)
> +{
> + fwts_passed(fw, "%s correctly returned sane looking "
> + "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64 ".", name, value);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * method_init()
> * initialize ACPI
> */
> @@ -606,9 +631,7 @@ static void method_test_passed_failed_return(
> if (method_check_type(fw, name, buf, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) == FWTS_OK) {
> uint32_t val = (uint32_t)obj->Integer.Value;
> if ((val == 0) || (val == 1))
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "%s correctly returned sane looking value "
> - "0x%8.8" PRIx32 ".", method, val);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> else {
> fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM,
> "MethodReturnZeroOrOne",
> @@ -1743,9 +1766,7 @@ static void method_test_STA_return(
> }
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_STA correctly returned sane looking "
> - "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64, obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -1806,9 +1827,7 @@ static void method_test_SEG_return(
> obj->Integer.Value);
> fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_METHOD_RETURN);
> } else
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_SEG correctly returned sane looking "
> - "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64, obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -2057,8 +2076,7 @@ static void method_test_Sx__return(
> obj->Package.Elements[1].Integer.Value);
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw, "%s correctly returned sane looking package.",
> - name);
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> #define method_test_Sx_(name) \
> @@ -2175,7 +2193,7 @@ static void method_test_CPC_return(
> method_test_type_mixed (fw, &failed, obj, 16, "EnableRegister");
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw, "_CPC correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_CPC(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -2301,8 +2319,7 @@ static void method_test_CSD_return(
> }
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_CSD correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_CSD(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -2478,7 +2495,7 @@ static void method_test_CST_return(
> free(cst_elements_ok);
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw, "%s correctly returned sane looking values.", name);
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "values");
> }
>
> static int method_test_CST(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -2528,8 +2545,7 @@ static void method_test_PCT_return(
> }
> }
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_PCT correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_PCT(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -2707,8 +2723,7 @@ static void method_test_PSS_return(
> }
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_PSS correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_PSS(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -2864,8 +2879,7 @@ static void method_test_TSD_return(
> }
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_TSD correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_TSD(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -3003,8 +3017,7 @@ static void method_test_TSS_return(
> free(tss_elements_ok);
>
> if (!failed)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_TSS correctly returned sane looking package.");
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "package");
> }
>
> static int method_test_TSS(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -3043,9 +3056,7 @@ static void method_test_LID_return(
> FWTS_UNUSED(private);
>
> if (method_check_type(fw, name, buf, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) == FWTS_OK)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_LID correctly returned sane looking value 0x%8.8" PRIx64,
> - obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
>
> static int method_test_LID(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -3077,9 +3088,7 @@ static void method_test_GCP_return(
> obj->Integer.Value);
> fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_METHOD_RETURN);
> } else {
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_GCP correctly returned sane looking "
> - "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64, obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -3143,9 +3152,7 @@ static void method_test_GWS_return(
> obj->Integer.Value);
> fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_METHOD_RETURN);
> } else {
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_GWS correctly returned sane looking "
> - "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64, obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -3812,9 +3819,7 @@ static void method_test_PSR_return(
> obj->Integer.Value);
> fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_METHOD_RETURN);
> } else
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_PSR correctly returned sane looking "
> - "value 0x%8.8" PRIx64, obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -4006,9 +4011,7 @@ static void method_test_THERM_return(
> * should not test the value being returned. In this
> * case, just pass this as a valid return type.
> */
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "%s correctly returned sane looking "
> - "return type.", name);
> + method_passed_sane(fw, name, "return type");
> } else {
> /*
> * The evaluation probably was a hard-coded value,
> @@ -4074,12 +4077,8 @@ static void method_test_TCx_return(
> ACPI_OBJECT *obj,
> void *private)
> {
> - if (method_check_type(fw, name, buf, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) == FWTS_OK) {
> - char *method = (char *)private;
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "%s correctly returned sane looking value 0x%8.8x",
> - method, (uint32_t)obj->Integer.Value);
> - }
> + if (method_check_type(fw, name, buf, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) == FWTS_OK)
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, (char*)private, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
>
> static int method_test_TC1(fwts_framework *fw)
> @@ -4164,9 +4163,7 @@ static void method_test_RTV_return(
> FWTS_UNUSED(private);
>
> if (method_check_type(fw, name, buf, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) == FWTS_OK)
> - fwts_passed(fw,
> - "_RTV correctly returned sane looking value 0x%8.8" PRIx64,
> - obj->Integer.Value);
> + method_passed_sane_uint64(fw, name, obj->Integer.Value);
> }
>
> static int method_test_RTV(fwts_framework *fw)
> --
> 1.8.0
>
Acked-by: Keng-Yu Lin <kengyu at canonical.com>
More information about the fwts-devel
mailing list