From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851AEA056D for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:19:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA9761C02C; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:19:25 +0100 (CET) Received: by dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 1017) id E6CCE1C02E; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:19:24 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20200312151654.7218-6-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> References: <20200312151654.7218-6-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> To: test-report@dpdk.org Cc: Lukasz Wojciechowski Message-Id: <20200312151924.E6CCE1C02E@dpdk.org> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:19:24 +0100 (CET) From: checkpatch@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-test-report] |WARNING| pw66595 [PATCH 05/13] app/test: introduce librte_security tests X-BeenThere: test-report@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: automatic DPDK test reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: test-report-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "test-report" Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/66595 _coding style issues_ WARNING:SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO: Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop #311: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:129: +#define TEST_ASSERT_MOCK_FUNCTION_CALL_RET(f_name, f_ret, exp_ret, \ + ret_spec) do { \ + TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL(exp_ret, f_ret, "Expecting " RTE_STR(f_name) \ + " to return " ret_spec ", but it returned " ret_spec " ", \ + exp_ret, f_ret); \ +} while (0) WARNING:SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT: suspect code indent for conditional statements (16, 8) #312: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:130: + ret_spec) do { \ + TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL(exp_ret, f_ret, "Expecting " RTE_STR(f_name) \ WARNING:SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO: Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop #324: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:142: +#define TEST_ASSERT_MOCK_FUNCTION_CALL_NOT_NULL(f_name, f_ret) do { \ + TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(f_ret, "Expecting " RTE_STR(f_name) \ + " to return not NULL "); \ +} while (0) ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #403: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:221: +static int +mock_session_create(void *device, + struct rte_security_session_conf *conf, + struct rte_security_session *sess, + struct rte_mempool *mp) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #434: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:252: +static int +mock_session_destroy(void *device, + struct rte_security_session *sess) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #506: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:324: +static int +testsuite_setup(void) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #523: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:341: +static void +testsuite_teardown(void) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #537: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:355: +static int +ut_setup(void) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #560: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:378: +static int +destroy_session_with_check(void) { ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: open brace '{' following function definitions go on the next line #587: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:405: +static void +ut_teardown(void) { WARNING:BRACES: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks #745: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:563: + for (i = 0; i < SECURITY_TEST_MEMPOOL_SIZE; ++i) { + rte_mempool_put(ts_params->session_mpool, (void *)(tmp[i])); + } WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 90 characters #827: FILE: app/test/test_security.c:645: + test_rte_security_session_create_inv_param_context_ops_fun), total: 7 errors, 5 warnings, 699 lines checked