* [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t
@ 2025-05-19 6:49 Jiaying Song via ltp
2025-09-19 16:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jiaying Song via ltp @ 2025-05-19 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp
From: Jiaying Song <jiaying.song.cn@windriver.com>
On 32-bit systems with Y2038 support, time_t is 64-bit while TST_RET remains a long (usually 32-bit).
Using TST_RET to store the return value of time() causes overflow after 2038, leading to incorrect comparisons
and false test failures like:
TFAIL: time() returned value -2085977741, stored value 2208989555 are different
This patch replaces usage of TST_RET with a local variable of type time_t (ret_time),
ensuring correct behavior with large timestamps and avoiding truncation.
Signed-off-by: Jiaying Song <jiaying.song.cn@windriver.com>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
index d8625c0..3da7f1c 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
@@ -24,24 +24,25 @@ time_t *targs[] = {
static void verify_time(unsigned int i)
{
time_t *tloc = targs[i];
+ time_t ret_time = time(tloc);
+
+ ret_time = time(tloc);
- TEST(time(tloc));
-
- if (TST_RET == -1) {
+ if (ret_time == -1) {
tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "time()");
return;
}
if (!tloc)
- tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %ld", TST_RET);
- else if (*tloc == TST_RET)
+ tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %lld", ret_time);
+ else if (*tloc == ret_time)
tst_res(TPASS,
- "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are same",
- TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
+ "time() returned value %lld, stored value %jd are same",
+ ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
else
tst_res(TFAIL,
- "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are different",
- TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
+ "time() returned value %lld, stored value %jd are different",
+ ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
}
static struct tst_test test = {
--
2.34.1
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t
2025-05-19 6:49 [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t Jiaying Song via ltp
@ 2025-09-19 16:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Cyril Hrubis @ 2025-09-19 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jiaying.song.cn; +Cc: ltp
Hi!
Sorry for the late reply.
> + time_t ret_time = time(tloc);
> +
> + ret_time = time(tloc);
>
> - TEST(time(tloc));
> -
> - if (TST_RET == -1) {
> + if (ret_time == -1) {
> tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "time()");
> return;
> }
>
> if (!tloc)
> - tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %ld", TST_RET);
> - else if (*tloc == TST_RET)
> + tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %lld", ret_time);
> + else if (*tloc == ret_time)
> tst_res(TPASS,
> - "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are same",
> - TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
> + "time() returned value %lld, stored value %jd are same",
> + ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
The ret_time needs a cast, since it's not always long long. Or we can
just use the %jd and cast to (intmax_t) as we do for the tloc argument.
> else
> tst_res(TFAIL,
> - "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are different",
> - TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
> + "time() returned value %lld, stored value %jd are different",
> + ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
> }
Here as well.
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t
@ 2025-10-20 11:13 Jiaying Song via ltp
2025-11-07 12:19 ` Petr Vorel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jiaying Song via ltp @ 2025-10-20 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp, chrubis
From: Jiaying Song <jiaying.song.cn@windriver.com>
On 32-bit systems with Y2038 support, time_t is 64-bit while TST_RET
remains a long (usually 32-bit).Using TST_RET to store the return value
of time() causes overflow after 2038, leading to incorrect comparisons
and false test failures like:
TFAIL: time() returned value -2085977741, stored value 2208989555 are different
This patch replaces usage of TST_RET with a local variable of type
time_t (ret_time), ensuring correct behavior with large timestamps and
avoiding truncation.
Signed-off-by: Jiaying Song <jiaying.song.cn@windriver.com>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c | 17 ++++++++---------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
index 9b176f892..7924f94b8 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
@@ -23,24 +23,23 @@ static time_t *targs[] = {
static void verify_time(unsigned int i)
{
time_t *tloc = targs[i];
+ time_t ret_time = time(tloc);
- TEST(time(tloc));
-
- if (TST_RET == -1) {
+ if (ret_time == -1) {
tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "time()");
return;
}
if (!tloc) {
- tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %ld", TST_RET);
- } else if (*tloc == TST_RET) {
+ tst_res(TPASS, "time() returned value %jd", (intmax_t) ret_time);
+ } else if (*tloc == ret_time) {
tst_res(TPASS,
- "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are same",
- TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
+ "time() returned value %jd, stored value %jd are same",
+ (intmax_t) ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
} else {
tst_res(TFAIL,
- "time() returned value %ld, stored value %jd are different",
- TST_RET, (intmax_t) *tloc);
+ "time() returned value %jd, stored value %jd are different",
+ (intmax_t) ret_time, (intmax_t) *tloc);
}
}
--
2.34.1
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t
2025-10-20 11:13 Jiaying Song via ltp
@ 2025-11-07 12:19 ` Petr Vorel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Petr Vorel @ 2025-11-07 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jiaying.song.cn; +Cc: ltp
Hi Jiaying,
> On 32-bit systems with Y2038 support, time_t is 64-bit while TST_RET
> remains a long (usually 32-bit).Using TST_RET to store the return value
> of time() causes overflow after 2038, leading to incorrect comparisons
> and false test failures like:
> TFAIL: time() returned value -2085977741, stored value 2208989555 are different
> This patch replaces usage of TST_RET with a local variable of type
> time_t (ret_time), ensuring correct behavior with large timestamps and
> avoiding truncation.
+1
...
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/time/time01.c
> @@ -23,24 +23,23 @@ static time_t *targs[] = {
> static void verify_time(unsigned int i)
> {
> time_t *tloc = targs[i];
> + time_t ret_time = time(tloc);
> - TEST(time(tloc));
nit: wrong whitespace indent (can be fixed before merge).
Fixed that and merged.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Petr
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-11-07 12:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-05-19 6:49 [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/time01:Avoid using TST_RET in time() test to support Y2038-safe time_t Jiaying Song via ltp
2025-09-19 16:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-10-20 11:13 Jiaying Song via ltp
2025-11-07 12:19 ` Petr Vorel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox