From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cyril Hrubis Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:44:22 +0200 Subject: [LTP] Purpose of clock_nanosleep2 tests ? In-Reply-To: <20200421092616.lnktrr4e4pv7wemm@vireshk-i7> References: <20200421092045.GC6577@yuki.lan> <20200421092616.lnktrr4e4pv7wemm@vireshk-i7> Message-ID: <20200421094422.GE6577@yuki.lan> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi! > > > While working on the time64 variants I stumbled upon > > > testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_nanosleep2/. > > > > > > The commit log says that we were trying to test clock_nanosleep2() > > > syscall, which I am unable to find, but still this ends up calling the kernel > > > variant directly for clock_nanosleep() only. > > > > > > What am I missing ? Why is this stuff required ? > > > > Hmm, I guess that there is no clock_nanosleep2() and the test is a > > result of a confusion of some kind. Maybe the author just confused > > clock_nanosleep(2) with clock_nanosleep2(). > > > > Looking at clock_nanosleep() tests, there does not seem to be a test > > for ABSTIME so the best solution would be to move the test to > > clock_nanosleep directory. What do you think? > > clock_nanosleep03.c already tests ABSTIME. I think we can just drop > clock_nanosleep2 directory completely. I will send a patch if that looks okay. clock_nanosleep03 is testing that inside of a time namespace, I think that there is still value of having the simpler test as well. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz