From: Tomasz Swierczek <t.swierczek@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 13:57:08 +0000 (+0100)
Subject: Add tests for privilege_info_has_privacy_attr
X-Git-Tag: submit/tizen/20220629.054736~2
X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=refs%2Fchanges%2F44%2F271744%2F2;p=platform%2Fcore%2Fsecurity%2Fprivilege-checker.git

Add tests for privilege_info_has_privacy_attr

This patch is supposed to increase code coverage of unit tests.

Change-Id: Ieeb1148c0f7a5bab5abd6591b940f5612c61de88
---

diff --git a/test/privilege-checker.c b/test/privilege-checker.c
index eaf7338..c018ee9 100644
--- a/test/privilege-checker.c
+++ b/test/privilege-checker.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ extern void __test_privilege_manager_get_mapped_privilege_list();
 extern void __test_privilege_manager_verify_metadata();
 extern void __test_privilege_manager_verify_privilege();
 
+extern void __test_privilege_privacy_attr();
 extern void __test_privilege_info_is_valid();
 extern void __test_privilege_info_is_internal();
 extern void __test_privilege_info_is_privacy();
@@ -111,9 +112,11 @@ int main()
 	__test_privilege_info_get_same_privacy_grouped_privileges();
 
 	//TODO: add testcase for privilege_info_get_privilege_noti_info_list() & privilege_info_free_privilege_noti_info_list()
-	//TODO: add testcase for privilege_info_has_privacy_attr()
 	//#########################################################################
 
+	__tcinfo(function, "privilege_info_has_privacy_attr");
+	__test_privilege_privacy_attr();
+
 	//#########################################################################
 	// tc-privilege-db-manager.c
 
diff --git a/test/tc-privilege-info.c b/test/tc-privilege-info.c
index 0831626..78b390e 100644
--- a/test/tc-privilege-info.c
+++ b/test/tc-privilege-info.c
@@ -4,6 +4,17 @@
 #include <privilege_package_info.h>
 #include <tc-common.h>
 
+static void __check_privilege_info_has_privacy_attr(int expected_result, const char* privilege)
+{
+    if (privilege_info_has_privacy_attr(privilege) == expected_result) {
+		success_cnt++;
+		printf_green("Test SUCCEEDED\n");
+	} else {
+		fail_cnt++;
+		printf_red("Test FAILED\n");
+	}
+}
+
 static void __check_get_privilege_display_name_result(privilege_manager_error_e expected_result, privilege_manager_error_e result, const char *display_name)
 {
 	printf("expected result = %s, result = %s\n", __get_result_string('m', expected_result), __get_result_string('m', result));
@@ -90,6 +101,24 @@ static void __check_get_privilege_group_display_name_result(privilege_manager_er
 	}
 }
 
+void __test_privilege_privacy_attr()
+{
+	__print_line();
+	__tcinfo(goal, POS_TC_PREFIX "check if http://tizen.org/privilege/camera is a privacy privilege");
+	__check_privilege_info_has_privacy_attr(1, "http://tizen.org/privilege/camera");
+	__print_line();
+
+	__print_line();
+	__tcinfo(goal, POS_TC_PREFIX "check if http://tizen.org/privilege/cameraaaaa is a privacy privilege");
+	__check_privilege_info_has_privacy_attr(0, "http://tizen.org/privilege/cameraaaaa");
+	__print_line();
+
+	__print_line();
+	__tcinfo(goal, NEG_TC_PREFIX "check NULL is a privacy privilege");
+	__check_privilege_info_has_privacy_attr(PRVMGR_ERR_INVALID_PARAMETER, NULL);
+	__print_line();
+}
+
 void __test_privilege_info_is_valid()
 {
 	int ret;