* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
@ 2020-06-04 11:41 Viresh Kumar
2020-06-08 17:59 ` Naresh Kamboju
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2020-06-04 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
The tests takes difference between two time readings and check it
against the offset set by the test. When the offset is set to a positive
value (eg 10000 ms), then the diff comes to a value >= 10000 ms (eg
10001 ms), and with divided by 1000, both sides evaluate to 10.
But when the offset is set to -10000 ms, then the delta is >= -10000 ms
(eg -9999) ms. And when divided by 1000, it comes to -9 != -10 and the
test reports error. Over that we are comparing value in seconds, which
is too large of a value. Change the test to compare delta in ms and fix
the false failures.
Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_gettime/clock_gettime03.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_gettime/clock_gettime03.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_gettime/clock_gettime03.c
index e6b9c9c7857c..8341051088d7 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_gettime/clock_gettime03.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_gettime/clock_gettime03.c
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ static void child(struct test_variants *tv, struct tcase *tc)
diff = tst_ts_diff_ms(then, now);
- if (diff/1000 != tc->off) {
+ if (diff - tc->off * 1000 > 10) {
tst_res(TFAIL, "Wrong offset (%s) read %llims",
tst_clock_name(tc->clk_id), diff);
} else {
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ static void child(struct test_variants *tv, struct tcase *tc)
diff = tst_ts_diff_ms(parent_then, now);
- if (diff/1000) {
+ if (diff > 10) {
tst_res(TFAIL, "Wrong offset (%s) read %llims",
tst_clock_name(tc->clk_id), diff);
} else {
--
2.25.0.rc1.19.g042ed3e048af
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-04 11:41 [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset Viresh Kumar
@ 2020-06-08 17:59 ` Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-18 13:35 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2020-06-08 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 17:11, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> The tests takes difference between two time readings and check it
> against the offset set by the test. When the offset is set to a positive
> value (eg 10000 ms), then the diff comes to a value >= 10000 ms (eg
> 10001 ms), and with divided by 1000, both sides evaluate to 10.
>
> But when the offset is set to -10000 ms, then the delta is >= -10000 ms
> (eg -9999) ms. And when divided by 1000, it comes to -9 != -10 and the
> test reports error. Over that we are comparing value in seconds, which
> is too large of a value. Change the test to compare delta in ms and fix
> the false failures.
Test ran for 100 iterations on x86 device and confirmed test getting pass.
>
> Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
ref:
https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5640
- Naresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-08 17:59 ` Naresh Kamboju
@ 2020-06-18 13:35 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vorel @ 2020-06-18 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
Hi Viresh, Naresh,
> Tested-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Thanks for your fix, testing.
Pushed.
Kind regards,
Petr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-08 17:59 ` Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-18 13:35 ` Petr Vorel
@ 2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 3:32 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-06-22 5:11 ` Viresh Kumar
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vorel @ 2020-06-18 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
Hi Naresh, Viresh,
> Test ran for 100 iterations on x86 device and confirmed test getting pass.
FYI with very high number of the tests it still can fail, but it's
much less likely:
./clock_gettime03 -i 100000
Summary:
passed 3599972
failed 28
skipped 0
warnings 0
Kind regards,
Petr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
@ 2020-06-19 3:32 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-06-19 9:38 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-22 5:11 ` Viresh Kumar
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2020-06-19 3:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
On 18-06-20, 15:42, Petr Vorel wrote:
> Hi Naresh, Viresh,
>
> > Test ran for 100 iterations on x86 device and confirmed test getting pass.
> FYI with very high number of the tests it still can fail, but it's
> much less likely:
>
> ./clock_gettime03 -i 100000
> Summary:
> passed 3599972
> failed 28
> skipped 0
> warnings 0
I am wondering why delta will be over 10 ms in any case.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-19 3:32 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2020-06-19 9:38 ` Petr Vorel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vorel @ 2020-06-19 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
Hi, Viresh,
> > > Test ran for 100 iterations on x86 device and confirmed test getting pass.
> > FYI with very high number of the tests it still can fail, but it's
> > much less likely:
> > ./clock_gettime03 -i 100000
> > Summary:
> > passed 3599972
> > failed 28
> > skipped 0
> > warnings 0
> I am wondering why delta will be over 10 ms in any case.
No idea, I hoped you'd know :).
Kind regards,
Petr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset
2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 3:32 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2020-06-22 5:11 ` Viresh Kumar
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2020-06-22 5:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
On 18-06-20, 15:42, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > Test ran for 100 iterations on x86 device and confirmed test getting pass.
> FYI with very high number of the tests it still can fail, but it's
> much less likely:
>
> ./clock_gettime03 -i 100000
> Summary:
> passed 3599972
> failed 28
> skipped 0
> warnings 0
I am not able to hit it on my x86 box, even after suppressing all the print
messages (in order to get rid of any delays). Looks like a hardware/platform bug
to me. I tried a loop of 100,00,000 as well :)
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-06-22 5:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-06-04 11:41 [LTP] [PATCH] clock_gettime03: Fix issues with negative offset Viresh Kumar
2020-06-08 17:59 ` Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-18 13:35 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-18 13:42 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 3:32 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-06-19 9:38 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-22 5:11 ` Viresh Kumar
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.