Re: [PATCH] selftests/timers/posix_timers: reimplement check_timer_distribution()

From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, Edward Liaw <edliaw@google.com>,
	Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@google.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/timers/posix_timers: reimplement check_timer_distribution()
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:03:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <280faf88-9bcd-4f0d-b02a-eb72cbefbb3e@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240411155053.GD5494@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 782 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 05:50:53PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/11, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> > Grrr. Let me stare at this.

> Damn ;)

> Can't we just turn ksft_min_kernel_version() into

> 	static inline int ksft_min_kernel_version(unsigned int min_major,
> 						  unsigned int min_minor)
> 	{
> 	#ifdef NOLIBC
> 		return -1;
> 	#else

That'd probably work well enough here.  I think it's reasonable for
someone who wants to build a test that uses ksft_min_kernel_version()
with nolibc to figure out how to implement it, right now it's not
actually getting used with nolibc and just happens to be seen due to
being in the same header.

> Not sure what should check_timer_distribution() do in this case, to me
> ksft_test_result_fail() is fine.

I'd go with skip but yeah.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]