On (01/06/15 20:56), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
There is a strange construct in our sss_domain_info handling code:
while (dom && dom->disabled) {
dom = get_next_domain(dom, true);
}
I wasn't sure if this code was valid at all, so I wrote a test. Turns
out the code is semi-valid -- if the domain you pass in is disabled,
which is technically possible. It could be shortened to "if" instead of
"while", but meh.
At least we have one more test :-)
From a622e79e7ffd02a5035ce9e61c42f7079c52c054 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 21:11:43 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] TESTS: Add test for get_next_domain
---
src/tests/cmocka/test_utils.c | 138 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 138 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/tests/cmocka/test_utils.c b/src/tests/cmocka/test_utils.c
index 0cfbaa5043e2a36551208b9da23d7423a35e60a4..5f0ca117688246844450c29f1a3182200725f6ae
100644
--- a/src/tests/cmocka/test_utils.c
+++ b/src/tests/cmocka/test_utils.c
@@ -454,6 +454,137 @@ void test_find_domain_by_sid_disabled(void **state)
}
}
+static struct sss_domain_info *named_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
+ const char *name,
+ struct sss_domain_info *parent)
+{
+ struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
+
+ dom = talloc_zero(mem_ctx, struct sss_domain_info);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+
+ dom->name = talloc_strdup(dom, name);
+ assert_non_null(dom->name);
+
+ dom->parent = parent;
+
+ return dom;
+}
+
+/*
+ * dom1 -> sub1a
+ * |
+ * dom2 -> sub2a -> sub2b
+ *
+ */
+static int setup_dom_tree(void **state)
+{
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx;
+ struct sss_domain_info *head = NULL;
+ struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
+
+ assert_true(leak_check_setup());
+
+ test_ctx = talloc_zero(global_talloc_context, struct dom_list_test_ctx);
+ assert_non_null(test_ctx);
+
+ dom = named_domain(test_ctx, "dom1", NULL);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ head = dom;
+
+ dom = named_domain(test_ctx, "sub1a", head);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ head->subdomains = dom;
+
+ dom = named_domain(test_ctx, "dom2", NULL);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ head->next = dom;
+
+ dom = named_domain(test_ctx, "sub2a", head->next);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ head->next->subdomains = dom;
+
+ dom = named_domain(test_ctx, "sub2b", head->next);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ head->next->subdomains->next = dom;
+
+ test_ctx->dom_count = 2;
+ test_ctx->dom_list = head;
+
+ check_leaks_push(test_ctx);
+ *state = test_ctx;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int teardown_dom_tree(void **state)
+{
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx = talloc_get_type(*state,
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx);
+ if (test_ctx == NULL) {
+ DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "Type mismatch\n");
+ return 1;
+ }
+
+ assert_true(check_leaks_pop(test_ctx) == true);
check_leaks_pop already return boolean.
So you needn't copare to true.
+ talloc_free(test_ctx);
+ assert_true(leak_check_teardown());
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void test_get_next_domain(void **state)
+{
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx = talloc_get_type(*state,
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx);
+ struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(test_ctx->dom_list, false);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ assert_string_equal(dom->name, "dom2");
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(dom, false);
+ assert_null(dom);
+}
+
+static void test_get_next_domain_descend(void **state)
+{
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx = talloc_get_type(*state,
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx);
+ struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(test_ctx->dom_list, true);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ assert_string_equal(dom->name, "sub1a");
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(dom, true);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ assert_string_equal(dom->name, "dom2");
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(dom, true);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ assert_string_equal(dom->name, "sub2a");
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(dom, true);
+ assert_non_null(dom);
+ assert_string_equal(dom->name, "sub2b");
+
+ dom = get_next_domain(dom, false);
+ assert_null(dom);
+}
+
+static void test_get_next_domain_disabled(void **state)
+{
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx = talloc_get_type(*state,
+ struct dom_list_test_ctx);
+ struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
+
+ for (dom = test_ctx->dom_list; dom; dom = get_next_domain(dom, true)) {
+ dom->disabled = true;
+ }
it would be good to have more test with combination of some disabled domains
and with or without subdomain.
There I have a question.
If main domain is disabled should we return its enabled subdomains?
Does it make sense?
Thank you very much for increasing code coverage.
LS