tests: Fix stack corruption in FpiSsm test

Using a function with a void return value for a g_timeout_add is not a
good idea after all.
This commit is contained in:
Benjamin Berg 2019-12-17 14:23:54 +01:00
parent bfd68bbc01
commit 2af0531994

View file

@ -39,6 +39,14 @@ typedef struct
gboolean expected_last_state;
} FpiSsmTestData;
static gboolean
fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer (gpointer * nullify_location)
{
*nullify_location = NULL;
return G_SOURCE_REMOVE;
}
static FpiSsmTestData *
fpi_ssm_test_data_new (void)
{
@ -334,7 +342,7 @@ test_ssm_next_with_delayed (void)
fpi_ssm_next_state (ssm);
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -442,7 +450,7 @@ test_ssm_jump_to_state_with_delayed (void)
fpi_ssm_jump_to_state (ssm, FPI_TEST_SSM_STATE_2);
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -559,7 +567,7 @@ test_ssm_mark_completed_with_delayed (void)
fpi_ssm_mark_completed (g_steal_pointer (&ssm));
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -623,7 +631,7 @@ test_ssm_mark_failed_with_delayed (void)
fpi_device_error_new (FP_DEVICE_ERROR_PROTO));
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -680,7 +688,7 @@ test_ssm_delayed_next_cancel (void)
g_assert_cmpuint (g_slist_length (data->handlers_chain), ==, 1);
g_idle_add_full (G_PRIORITY_HIGH, test_ssm_cancel_delayed_action_delayed, ssm, NULL);
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -875,7 +883,7 @@ test_ssm_delayed_jump_to_state_cancel (void)
g_assert_cmpuint (g_slist_length (data->handlers_chain), ==, 1);
g_idle_add_full (G_PRIORITY_HIGH, test_ssm_cancel_delayed_action_delayed, ssm, NULL);
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -1058,7 +1066,7 @@ test_ssm_delayed_mark_completed_not_started (void)
fpi_ssm_mark_completed_delayed (ssm, 10, NULL);
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &ssm);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &ssm);
g_test_expect_message (G_LOG_DOMAIN, G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL, "*BUG:*completed*");
while (ssm != NULL)
@ -1088,7 +1096,7 @@ test_ssm_delayed_mark_completed_cancel (void)
g_assert_cmpuint (g_slist_length (data->handlers_chain), ==, 1);
g_idle_add_full (G_PRIORITY_HIGH, test_ssm_cancel_delayed_action_delayed, ssm, NULL);
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);
@ -1312,7 +1320,7 @@ test_ssm_subssm_start_with_delayed (void)
fpi_ssm_start_subsm (ssm, subssm);
g_test_assert_expected_messages ();
g_timeout_add (100, (GSourceFunc) g_nullify_pointer, &timeout_tracker);
g_timeout_add (100, G_SOURCE_FUNC (fpi_ssm_test_nullify_pointer), &timeout_tracker);
while (timeout_tracker)
g_main_context_iteration (NULL, TRUE);