Use INFINITE_LOOP macro for loop control in unit test

chinglee-iot commented 1 year ago

Description

Use the following pattern for loop control in unit test.

for( ; configCONTROL_INFINITE_LOOP(); )
{
    ....
}

In the unit test, the configCONTROL_INFINITE_LOOP can be defined to a mocked function for loop controlling.

#define configCONTROL_INFINITE_LOOP vFakeInfinitLoop

Test Steps

N/A

Checklist:

[x] I have tested my changes. No regression in existing tests.
[ ] ~~I have modified and/or added unit-tests to cover the code changes in this Pull Request.~~

Related Issue

Address #750 comment in line 290.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

codecov[bot] commented 1 year ago

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (97d48ba) 93.62% compared to head (f7838cc) 93.62%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #783 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 93.62% 93.62% ======================================= Files 6 6 Lines 2508 2508 Branches 598 598 ======================================= Hits 2348 2348 Misses 107 107 Partials 53 53 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/783/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/783/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | `93.62% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. | [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/783?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [tasks.c](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/783?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#diff-dGFza3MuYw==) | `94.81% <ø> (ø)` | | | [timers.c](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/783?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#diff-dGltZXJzLmM=) | `98.77% <ø> (ø)` | |

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

chinglee-iot commented 1 year ago

The uncovered line is because there is no unit test to cover it. This PR doesn't change the logic in the implementation.