From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UsN1Y-00066r-NN for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:58:52 +0000 Received: from [222.73.24.84] (helo=song.cn.fujitsu.com) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UsN1W-0000gE-GY for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:58:52 +0000 Message-ID: <51CCDF3A.70001@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:56:26 +0800 From: Wanlong Gao MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1372304589-16585-1-git-send-email-gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com> <1529763918.536440.1372325997166.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1529763918.536440.1372325997166.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] clock_settime03: don't test PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and THREAD_CPUTIME_ID Reply-To: gaowanlong@cn.fujitsu.com List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jan Stancek Cc: LTP On 06/27/2013 05:39 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Wanlong Gao" >> To: "LTP" >> Cc: "Cyril Hrubis" , "Caspar Zhang" , "Garrett Cooper" , >> "Mike Frysinger" , jstancek@redhat.com, "Wanlong Gao" >> 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 >> --- >> 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 >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list