jobs: use job locks also in the unit tests

Add missing job synchronization in the unit tests, with
explicit locks.

We are deliberately using _locked functions wrapped by a guard
instead of a normal call because the normal call will be removed
in future, as the only usage is limited to the tests.

In other words, if a function like job_pause() is/will be only used
in tests to avoid:

WITH_JOB_LOCK_GUARD(){
    job_pause_locked();
}

then it is not worth keeping job_pause(), and just use the guard.

Note: at this stage, job_{lock/unlock} and job lock guard macros
are *nop*.

Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20220926093214.506243-10-eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 15 insertions, 9 deletions

diff --git a/tests/unit/test-blockjob-txn.c b/tests/unit/test-blockjob-txn.c
index c69028b..d3b0bb2 100644
--- a/tests/unit/test-blockjob-txn.c
+++ b/tests/unit/test-blockjob-txn.c
@@ -116,8 +116,10 @@ static void test_single_job(int expected)
     job = test_block_job_start(1, true, expected, &result, txn);
     job_start(&job->job);
 
-    if (expected == -ECANCELED) {
-        job_cancel(&job->job, false);
+    WITH_JOB_LOCK_GUARD() {
+        if (expected == -ECANCELED) {
+            job_cancel_locked(&job->job, false);
+        }
     }
 
     while (result == -EINPROGRESS) {
@@ -160,13 +162,15 @@ static void test_pair_jobs(int expected1, int expected2)
     /* Release our reference now to trigger as many nice
      * use-after-free bugs as possible.
      */
-    job_txn_unref(txn);
+    WITH_JOB_LOCK_GUARD() {
+        job_txn_unref_locked(txn);
 
-    if (expected1 == -ECANCELED) {
-        job_cancel(&job1->job, false);
-    }
-    if (expected2 == -ECANCELED) {
-        job_cancel(&job2->job, false);
+        if (expected1 == -ECANCELED) {
+            job_cancel_locked(&job1->job, false);
+        }
+        if (expected2 == -ECANCELED) {
+            job_cancel_locked(&job2->job, false);
+        }
     }
 
     while (result1 == -EINPROGRESS || result2 == -EINPROGRESS) {
@@ -219,7 +223,9 @@ static void test_pair_jobs_fail_cancel_race(void)
     job_start(&job1->job);
     job_start(&job2->job);
 
-    job_cancel(&job1->job, false);
+    WITH_JOB_LOCK_GUARD() {
+        job_cancel_locked(&job1->job, false);
+    }
 
     /* Now make job2 finish before the main loop kicks jobs.  This simulates
      * the race between a pending kick and another job completing.