[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer fixes

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer fixes

[Piotr Gawel]

Hello LTP community,

As requested, I've split my previous patch into two and resigned
from third change (hardening).
Please review these patches and add them to main stream.

Kind regards,
Piotr

Piotr Gawel (2):
  tst_timer: fix qsort comparison function
  tst_timer: fix verification of execution time

 lib/tst_timer_test.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.7.4

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix qsort comparison function

[Piotr Gawel]

From qsort() manual:
    The  comparison  function must return an integer
    less than, equal to, or greater than zero if the
    first argument is considered to be respectively
    less than, equal to, or greater than the second.
    If two members compare as equal, their order in
    the sorted array is undefined.
We need it in descending order so the logic is
reverted.

Signed-off-by: Piotr Gawel <piotr.krzysztof.gawel@gmail.com>
---
 lib/tst_timer_test.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/tst_timer_test.c b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
index 4c16b59..f6459e5 100644
--- a/lib/tst_timer_test.c
+++ b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ static int cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
 {
 	const long long *aa = a, *bb = b;
 
-	return *aa < *bb;
+	return (*bb - *aa);
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.7.4

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix qsort comparison function

[Cyril Hrubis]

Hi!
Pushed, thanks.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix verification of execution time

[Piotr Gawel]

Each sample needs to be in range:
    t < s[i] < t + threshold
Thus for i from the interval [d...n]:
    (n-d)*t < sum(s[d...n]) < (n-d)*(t + threshold)
This patch fixes that check.

Signed-off-by: Piotr Gawel <piotr.krzysztof.gawel@gmail.com>
---
 lib/tst_timer_test.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/tst_timer_test.c b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
index f6459e5..4508e29 100644
--- a/lib/tst_timer_test.c
+++ b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ void do_timer_test(long long usec, unsigned int nsamples)
 		samples[nsamples-1], samples[0], median,
 		1.00 * trunc_mean / keep_samples, discard);
 
-	if (trunc_mean > (nsamples - discard) * usec + threshold) {
+	if (trunc_mean > keep_samples * (usec + threshold)) {
 		tst_res(TFAIL, "%s slept for too long", scall);
 
 		if (!print_frequency_plot)
-- 
2.7.4

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix verification of execution time

[Cyril Hrubis]

Hi!
> Each sample needs to be in range:
>     t < s[i] < t + threshold
> Thus for i from the interval [d...n]:
>     (n-d)*t < sum(s[d...n]) < (n-d)*(t + threshold)
> This patch fixes that check.

As far as I can tell the function compute_treshold() multiplies the
threshold per call by keep_samples already, so it's a threashold per run
not a treshold per call, or do I miss something?

> Signed-off-by: Piotr Gawel <piotr.krzysztof.gawel@gmail.com>
> ---
>  lib/tst_timer_test.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/tst_timer_test.c b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
> index f6459e5..4508e29 100644
> --- a/lib/tst_timer_test.c
> +++ b/lib/tst_timer_test.c
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ void do_timer_test(long long usec, unsigned int nsamples)
>  		samples[nsamples-1], samples[0], median,
>  		1.00 * trunc_mean / keep_samples, discard);
>  
> -	if (trunc_mean > (nsamples - discard) * usec + threshold) {
> +	if (trunc_mean > keep_samples * (usec + threshold)) {
>  		tst_res(TFAIL, "%s slept for too long", scall);
>  		if (!print_frequency_plot)
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

[LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix verification of execution time

[piotr.krzysztof.gawel]

Hi,Oops. I missed that. Please reject this patch.BR, PiotrWys?ano z mojego smartfona Samsung Galaxy.
-------- Oryginalna wiadomo?? --------Od: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> Data: 25.07.2019  16:45  (GMT+01:00) Do: Piotr Gawel <piotr.krzysztof.gawel@gmail.com> DW: ltp@lists.linux.it Temat: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] tst_timer: fix verification of execution time Hi!> Each sample needs to be in range:>???? t < s[i] < t + threshold> Thus for i from the interval [d...n]:>???? (n-d)*t < sum(s[d...n]) < (n-d)*(t + threshold)> This patch fixes that check.As far as I can tell the function compute_treshold() multiplies thethreshold per call by keep_samples already, so it's a threashold per runnot a treshold per call, or do I miss something?> Signed-off-by: Piotr Gawel <piotr.krzysztof.gawel@gmail.com>> --->? lib/tst_timer_test.c | 2 +->? 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)> > diff --git a/lib/tst_timer_test.c b/lib/tst_timer_test.c> index f6459e5..4508e29 100644> --- a/lib/tst_timer_test.c> +++ b/lib/tst_timer_test.c> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ void do_timer_test(long long usec, unsigned int nsamples)>? 		samples[nsamples-1], samples[0], median,>? 		1.00 * trunc_mean / keep_samples, discard);>? > -	if (trunc_mean > (nsamples - discard) * usec + threshold) {> +	if (trunc_mean > keep_samples * (usec + threshold)) {>? 		tst_res(TFAIL, "%s slept for too long", scall);>? 		if (!print_frequency_plot)> -- > 2.7.4> > > -- > Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp-- Cyril Hrubischrubis@suse.cz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20190725/2c4d35e6/attachment.htm>