On 11/15/18 8:04 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
Test that very big/small values are not accepted and that ranges with
only one element work.
Rename expect4 to expect5, as we will be moving that to a separate ulist
test after the rework.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com>
---
tests/test-string-input-visitor.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
I don't see a test for a range that wraps around (such as UINT_MAX-0);
that's worth testing (whether it happens to work or is rejected as
invalid). Do we require ranges to be ascending, or does 6-5 result in
the sequence 5, 6? I also recall that our range code imposes a limit on
the maximum elements present in a single range, in order to prevent
denial-of-service attacks where a caller could request 0-INT_MAX to
exhaust resources enumerating everything in the range; does our
testsuite cover those limits?
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
