[PATCH 06/42] tests: update for touch support

[walter harms]

Am 16.12.2011 12:12, schrieb Peter Hutterer:
> On 16/12/11 20:56 , walter harms wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 15.12.2011 04:01, schrieb Peter Hutterer:
>>> Touch event mask must be set for all three event types.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer<peter.hutterer at who-t.net>
>>> ---
>>>   test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c |    2 +-
>>>   test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c      |   38
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>   2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>>> b/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>>> index 89ffc3d..b405556 100644
>>> --- a/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>>> +++ b/test/xi2/protocol-xipassivegrabdevice.c
>>> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static void test_XIPassiveGrabDevice(void)
>>>       request->deviceid = XIAllMasterDevices;
>>>
>>>       printf("Testing invalid grab types\n");
>>> -    for (i = XIGrabtypeFocusIn + 1; i<  0xFF; i++)
>>> +    for (i = XIGrabtypeTouchBegin + 1; i<  0xFF; i++)
>>>       {
>>>           request->grab_type = i;
>>>           request_XIPassiveGrabDevice(&client_request, request,
>>> BadValue, request->grab_type);
>>> diff --git a/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>>> b/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>>> index 4eaf839..0390858 100644
>>> --- a/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>>> +++ b/test/xi2/protocol-xiselectevents.c
>>> @@ -125,6 +125,28 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvent(xXISelectEventsReq *req, int error)
>>>       assert(rc == error);
>>>   }
>>>
>>> +static void _set_bit(unsigned char *bits, int bit)
>>> +{
>>> +    SetBit(bits, bit);
>>> +    if (bit>= XI_TouchBegin&&  bit<= XI_TouchOwnership)
>>> +    {
>>> +        SetBit(bits, XI_TouchBegin);
>>> +        SetBit(bits, XI_TouchUpdate);
>>> +        SetBit(bits, XI_TouchEnd);
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>
>> So far i understand you want to avoid setting already set bits.
>> Would it hurt to set them again ?
> 
> if any of the four XI_Touch* is set, begin/update/end must be set.
> setting them twice doesn't hurt, especially not in a test. And we have a
> test in input.c that makes sure that SetBit on masks works as expected,
> iirc.
> 
> 
>>> +static void _clear_bit(unsigned char *bits, int bit)
>>> +{
>>> +    ClearBit(bits, bit);
>>> +    if (bit>= XI_TouchBegin&&  bit<= XI_TouchOwnership)
>>> +    {
>>> +        ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchBegin);
>>> +        ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchUpdate);
>>> +        ClearBit(bits, XI_TouchEnd);
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> The naming is unfortunate.
> 
> huh?
> 
> 

you have a ClearBit(bits, bit); that set bit in bits, right ?
(if not the case folds here)
now you have a _clear_bit() that behaves differently as is tests
the bit argument, lets says in a future release XI_TouchBegin will
be >XI_TouchOwnership. Would you expekt that _clear_bit is responsible ?

Just call .. _clear_xi_bits() (no idea if that is a good name, neither it
is a matter of live and dead but if some odd things happen then they should
show up in tests).

re,
 wh



>>>   static void request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>   {
>>>       int i, j;
>>> @@ -157,9 +179,9 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>           memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>>>           for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>>>           {
>>> -            SetBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _set_bit(bits, j);
>>>               request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>>> -            ClearBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _clear_bit(bits, j);
>>>           }
>>>
>>>           /* Test 2:
>>> @@ -173,7 +195,7 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>
>>>           for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>>>           {
>>> -            SetBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _set_bit(bits, j);
>>>               request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>>>           }
>>>
>>> @@ -187,9 +209,9 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>
>>>           for (j = XI2LASTEVENT + 1; j<  mask->mask_len * 4; j++)
>>>           {
>>> -            SetBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _set_bit(bits, j);
>>>               request_XISelectEvent(req, BadValue);
>>> -            ClearBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _clear_bit(bits, j);
>>>           }
>>>
>>>           /* Test 4:
>>> @@ -200,7 +222,7 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>           memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>>>           for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>>>           {
>>> -            SetBit(bits, j);
>>> +            _set_bit(bits, j);
>>>               request_XISelectEvent(req, Success);
>>>           }
>>>
>>> @@ -227,8 +249,8 @@ static void
>>> request_XISelectEvents_masks(xXISelectEventsReq *req)
>>>           mask->mask_len = (nmasks + 3)/4;
>>>           memset(bits, 0, mask->mask_len * 4);
>>>           for (j = 0; j<= XI2LASTEVENT; j++)
>>> -            SetBit(bits, j);
>>> -        ClearBit(bits, XI_HierarchyChanged);
>>> +            _set_bit(bits, j);
>>> +        _clear_bit(bits, XI_HierarchyChanged);
>>>           for (j = 1; j<  6; j++)
>>>           {
>>>               mask->deviceid = j;
> 
>