Re: [RFC PATCH] tests/qtest: don't step clock at start of npcm7xx periodic IRQ test

[Hao Wu <wuhaotsh@google.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1629 bytes --]

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 6:20 PM Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:

> Hao Wu <wuhaotsh@google.com> writes:
>
> > Have you tried that the test can pass with this? If I remember
> correctly, interrupt won't trigger properly if not advancing the
> > timer
>
> Yes but the IRQ has yet to be enabled at this point.
>
I believe that's the case,  so we should be able to remove this line in the
test.

>
> >
> > If the test passes it's probably fine to remove that.
>
> Of course.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 11:00 PM Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >  Until there are timers enabled the semantics of clock_step_next() will
> >  fail. Since d524441a36 (system/qtest: properly feedback results of
> >  clock_[step|set]) we will signal a FAIL if time doesn't advance.
> >
> >  Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>
Reviewed-by: Hao Wu <wuhaotsh@google.com>

> >  ---
> >   tests/qtest/npcm7xx_timer-test.c | 1 -
> >   1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >  diff --git a/tests/qtest/npcm7xx_timer-test.c
> b/tests/qtest/npcm7xx_timer-test.c
> >  index 58f58c2f71..43711049ca 100644
> >  --- a/tests/qtest/npcm7xx_timer-test.c
> >  +++ b/tests/qtest/npcm7xx_timer-test.c
> >  @@ -465,7 +465,6 @@ static void test_periodic_interrupt(gconstpointer
> test_data)
> >       int i;
> >
> >       tim_reset(td);
> >  -    clock_step_next();
> >
> >       tim_write_ticr(td, count);
> >       tim_write_tcsr(td, CEN | IE | MODE_PERIODIC | PRESCALE(ps));
> >  --
> >  2.39.5
>
> --
> Alex Bennée
> Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2696 bytes --]