dlck_vos_cont_recs_get_active() unit tests

[janekmi]

This change is 

[github-actions]

Errors are component not formatted correctly,Ticket number prefix incorrect,PR title is malformatted. See https://daosio.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DC/pages/11133911069/Commit+Comments,Unable to load ticket data
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/dlck_vos_cont_recs_get_active()

[osalyk]

Reviewed 8 of 8 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @janekmi)

---

src/utils/dlck/tests/dlck_vos_cont_recs_get_active_ut.c line 88 at r1 (raw file):

	assert_ptr_equal(dv, DV_MOCK);
	return mock_type(int);
}

Macros or maybe aliases?

Code quote:

int
dlck_obj_get_active(daos_handle_t coh, struct vos_iterator *iter, d_vector_t *dv)
{
	assert_int_equal(coh.cookie, Coh.cookie);
	assert_ptr_equal(iter, VOS_ITER_MOCK);
	assert_ptr_equal(dv, DV_MOCK);
	return mock_type(int);
}

int
dlck_irec_get_active(daos_handle_t coh, struct vos_iterator *iter, d_vector_t *dv)
{
	assert_int_equal(coh.cookie, Coh.cookie);
	assert_ptr_equal(iter, VOS_ITER_MOCK);
	assert_ptr_equal(dv, DV_MOCK);
	return mock_type(int);
}

int
dlck_sv_add_if_active(daos_handle_t coh, struct vos_iterator *iter, d_vector_t *dv)
{
	assert_int_equal(coh.cookie, Coh.cookie);
	assert_ptr_equal(iter, VOS_ITER_MOCK);
	assert_ptr_equal(dv, DV_MOCK);
	return mock_type(int);
}

int
dlck_ev_add_if_active(daos_handle_t coh, struct vos_iterator *iter, d_vector_t *dv)
{
	assert_int_equal(coh.cookie, Coh.cookie);
	assert_ptr_equal(iter, VOS_ITER_MOCK);
	assert_ptr_equal(dv, DV_MOCK);
	return mock_type(int);
}

[janekmi]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @osalyk)

---

src/utils/dlck/tests/dlck_vos_cont_recs_get_active_ut.c line 88 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, osalyk (Oksana Sałyk) wrote…

Macros or maybe aliases?

1. We can't have a helper function here for two reasons:

• having assert_*() in a helper will also cause the error report to point a helper instead of the function the helper was called from.
• mock_type(int) has to be in a function the value is prepared for. So, providing values for a helper instead for the mocked functions directly will highly decrease the tests readability.

2. We can't have a macro either:

• the error report will point a single line where the macro was used at best. Considering there are three assertions there it will be tricky to determine where the issue is.

Considering all of the above and that there are only 4 such functions I believe it would be best to keep them as they are.

[osalyk]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @janekmi)

---

src/utils/dlck/tests/dlck_vos_cont_recs_get_active_ut.c line 88 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, janekmi (Jan Michalski) wrote…

1. We can't have a helper function here for two reasons:

• having assert_*() in a helper will also cause the error report to point a helper instead of the function the helper was called from.
• mock_type(int) has to be in a function the value is prepared for. So, providing values for a helper instead for the mocked functions directly will highly decrease the tests readability.

2. We can't have a macro either:

• the error report will point a single line where the macro was used at best. Considering there are three assertions there it will be tricky to determine where the issue is.

Considering all of the above and that there are only 4 such functions I believe it would be best to keep them as they are.

pity, but I understand