kunit: Allow passing function pointer to kunit_activate_static_stub()
Swap the arguments to typecheck_fn() in kunit_activate_static_stub() so that real_fn_addr can be either the function itself or a pointer to that function. This is useful to simplify redirecting static functions in a module. Having to pass the actual function meant that it must be exported from the module. Either making the 'static' and EXPORT_SYMBOL*() conditional (which makes the code messy), or change it to always exported (which increases the export namespace and prevents the compiler inlining a trivial stub function in non-test builds). With the original definition of kunit_activate_static_stub() the address of real_fn_addr was passed to typecheck_fn() as the type to be passed. This meant that if real_fn_addr was a pointer-to-function it would resolve to a ** instead of a *, giving an error like this: error: initialization of ‘int (**)(int)’ from incompatible pointer type ‘int (*)(int)’ [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] kunit_activate_static_stub(test, add_one_fn_ptr, subtract_one); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/typecheck.h:21:25: note: in definition of macro ‘typecheck_fn’ 21 | ({ typeof(type) __tmp = function; \ Swapping the arguments to typecheck_fn makes it take the type of a pointer to the replacement function. Either a function or a pointer to function can be assigned to that. For example: static int some_function(int x) { /* whatever */ } int (* some_function_ptr)(int) = some_function; static int replacement(int x) { /* whatever */ } Then: kunit_activate_static_stub(test, some_function, replacement); yields: typecheck_fn(typeof(&replacement), some_function); and: kunit_activate_static_stub(test, some_function_ptr, replacement); yields: typecheck_fn(typeof(&replacement), some_function_ptr); The two typecheck_fn() then resolve to: int (*__tmp)(int) = some_function; and int (*__tmp)(int) = some_function_ptr; Both of these are valid. In the first case the compiler inserts an implicit '&' to take the address of the supplied function, and in the second case the RHS is already a pointer to the same type. Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> Reviewed-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment