From: Wanlong G. <gao...@cn...> - 2013-06-27 03:45:40
|
PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> --- testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c index a949303..3693395 100644 --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { CLOCK_REALTIME, CLOCK_REALTIME, CLOCK_REALTIME, - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID }; int testcases[] = { @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ EPERM, /* non-root user */ - 0, - 0, }; char *TCID = "clock_settime03"; @@ -70,17 +66,6 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) if ((msg = parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL)) != NULL) tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg); - /* PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID & THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported on - * kernel versions lower than 2.6.12 and changed back in 2.6.38 - */ - if ((tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 12)) < 0 || (tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 38)) >= 0) { - testcases[7] = EINVAL; - testcases[8] = EINVAL; - } else { - testcases[7] = EFAULT; - testcases[8] = EFAULT; - } - setup(); for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) { -- 1.8.3.1.448.gfb7dfaa |
From: Garrett C. <yan...@gm...> - 2013-06-27 03:47:11
|
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...>wrote: > PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before > kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are > thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them > from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. > LGTM -- assuming that POSIX still doesn't reference those. Thanks! -Garrett |
From: Garrett C. <yan...@gm...> - 2013-06-27 03:47:56
|
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Garrett Cooper <yan...@gm...> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...>wrote: > >> PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before >> kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are >> thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them >> from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. >> > > LGTM -- assuming that POSIX still doesn't reference those. > Thanks! > -Garrett > Scratch that. It's just "LGTM". -Garrertt |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2013-06-27 09:40:08
|
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wanlong Gao" <gao...@cn...> > To: "LTP" <ltp...@li...> > Cc: "Cyril Hrubis" <ch...@su...>, "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...>, "Garrett Cooper" <yan...@gm...>, > "Mike Frysinger" <va...@ge...>, jst...@re..., "Wanlong Gao" <gao...@cn...> > Sent: Thursday, 27 June, 2013 5:43:09 AM > Subject: [PATCH] clock_settime03: don't test PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID > > PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before > kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are > thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them > from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. Hi, Isn't this test testing that these are not supported? EINVAL The clk_id specified is not supported on this system. Are these going to be removed completely? What is the risk if we keep them? Regards, Jan > > Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> > --- > testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- > 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > index a949303..3693395 100644 > --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { > CLOCK_REALTIME, > CLOCK_REALTIME, > CLOCK_REALTIME, > - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, > - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID > }; > > int testcases[] = { > @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { > EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ > EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ > EPERM, /* non-root user */ > - 0, > - 0, > }; > > char *TCID = "clock_settime03"; > @@ -70,17 +66,6 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) > if ((msg = parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL)) != NULL) > tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg); > > - /* PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID & THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported on > - * kernel versions lower than 2.6.12 and changed back in 2.6.38 > - */ > - if ((tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 12)) < 0 || (tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 38)) >= 0) { > - testcases[7] = EINVAL; > - testcases[8] = EINVAL; > - } else { > - testcases[7] = EFAULT; > - testcases[8] = EFAULT; > - } > - > setup(); > > for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) { > -- > 1.8.3.1.448.gfb7dfaa > > |
From: Wanlong G. <gao...@cn...> - 2013-06-28 00:58:52
|
On 06/27/2013 05:39 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Wanlong Gao" <gao...@cn...> >> To: "LTP" <ltp...@li...> >> Cc: "Cyril Hrubis" <ch...@su...>, "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...>, "Garrett Cooper" <yan...@gm...>, >> "Mike Frysinger" <va...@ge...>, jst...@re..., "Wanlong Gao" <gao...@cn...> >> Sent: Thursday, 27 June, 2013 5:43:09 AM >> Subject: [PATCH] clock_settime03: don't test PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID >> >> PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before >> kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are >> thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them >> from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. > > Hi, > > Isn't this test testing that these are not supported? > EINVAL The clk_id specified is not supported on this system. > > Are these going to be removed completely? > What is the risk if we keep them? The problem is what Cyril said in this thread. Thanks, Wanlong Gao > > Regards, > Jan > >> >> Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> >> --- >> testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- >> 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> index a949303..3693395 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, >> - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID >> }; >> >> int testcases[] = { >> @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { >> EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ >> EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ >> EPERM, /* non-root user */ >> - 0, >> - 0, >> }; >> >> char *TCID = "clock_settime03"; >> @@ -70,17 +66,6 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) >> if ((msg = parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL)) != NULL) >> tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg); >> >> - /* PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID & THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported on >> - * kernel versions lower than 2.6.12 and changed back in 2.6.38 >> - */ >> - if ((tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 12)) < 0 || (tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 38)) >= 0) { >> - testcases[7] = EINVAL; >> - testcases[8] = EINVAL; >> - } else { >> - testcases[7] = EFAULT; >> - testcases[8] = EFAULT; >> - } >> - >> setup(); >> >> for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) { >> -- >> 1.8.3.1.448.gfb7dfaa >> >> > |
From: <ch...@su...> - 2013-06-27 12:18:38
|
Hi! > PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before > kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are > thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them > from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. > > Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> > --- > testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- > 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > index a949303..3693395 100644 > --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c > @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { > CLOCK_REALTIME, > CLOCK_REALTIME, > CLOCK_REALTIME, > - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, > - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID > }; > > int testcases[] = { > @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { > EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ > EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ > EPERM, /* non-root user */ > - 0, > - 0, > }; What is the exact issue here? I suspect that the problem is that the errno values are not stable between kernel versions but AFAIK the PROCESS_CPUTIME clocks were never setable but that shouldn't stop us from trying to set them and expect failure. So what about we change the code to expect failure with unspecified errno or add a list of expected errnos broad enough to cover all kernel versions? And btw, the Linux implementation is POSIXly correct as the ability to set these clocks is left open to implementation. -- Cyril Hrubis ch...@su... |
From: Wanlong G. <gao...@cn...> - 2013-06-28 01:01:04
|
On 06/27/2013 08:20 PM, ch...@su... wrote: > Hi! >> PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before >> kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are >> thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them >> from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> >> --- >> testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- >> 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> index a949303..3693395 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >> @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> CLOCK_REALTIME, >> - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, >> - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID >> }; >> >> int testcases[] = { >> @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { >> EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ >> EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ >> EPERM, /* non-root user */ >> - 0, >> - 0, >> }; > > What is the exact issue here? > > I suspect that the problem is that the errno values are not stable > between kernel versions but AFAIK the PROCESS_CPUTIME clocks were never > setable but that shouldn't stop us from trying to set them and expect > failure. So what about we change the code to expect failure with > unspecified errno or add a list of expected errnos broad enough to cover > all kernel versions? OK, if we want to keep it here, I think add a list of expected errnos is better. Any other ideas? Thanks, Wanlong Gao > > And btw, the Linux implementation is POSIXly correct as the ability to > set these clocks is left open to implementation. > |
From: Wanlong G. <gao...@cn...> - 2013-06-28 01:17:47
|
On 06/28/2013 08:58 AM, Wanlong Gao wrote: > On 06/27/2013 08:20 PM, ch...@su... wrote: >> Hi! >>> PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID are not supported before >>> kernel 2.6.12, and changed back since 2.6.38. And they are >>> thought improper supported on Linux, so we just remove them >>> from the test of clock_settime and remain them be untested. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gao...@cn...> >>> --- >>> testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c | 15 --------------- >>> 1 file changed, 15 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >>> index a949303..3693395 100644 >>> --- a/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/timers/clock_settime/clock_settime03.c >>> @@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ clockid_t clocks[] = { >>> CLOCK_REALTIME, >>> CLOCK_REALTIME, >>> CLOCK_REALTIME, >>> - CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, >>> - CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID >>> }; >>> >>> int testcases[] = { >>> @@ -49,8 +47,6 @@ int testcases[] = { >>> EINVAL, /* Invalid timespec */ >>> EINVAL, /* NSEC_PER_SEC + 1 */ >>> EPERM, /* non-root user */ >>> - 0, >>> - 0, >>> }; >> >> What is the exact issue here? >> >> I suspect that the problem is that the errno values are not stable >> between kernel versions but AFAIK the PROCESS_CPUTIME clocks were never >> setable but that shouldn't stop us from trying to set them and expect >> failure. So what about we change the code to expect failure with >> unspecified errno or add a list of expected errnos broad enough to cover >> all kernel versions? > > OK, if we want to keep it here, I think add a list of expected errnos > is better. Any other ideas? Disagree myself, since the errnos here is useless for testing, so expect failure with unspecified errno will be better. Thanks, Wanlong Gao > > Thanks, > Wanlong Gao > >> >> And btw, the Linux implementation is POSIXly correct as the ability to >> set these clocks is left open to implementation. >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > Ltp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > |