[PATCH v2] Test for clock_nanosleep with CLOCK_MONOTONIC option.

Joel Sherrill joel at rtems.org
Wed Aug 12 22:16:17 UTC 2020 

What's the status of this test? The last email seems to indicate it needed
further work before being merged.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:16 AM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:11 AM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 10:56 PM Sebastian Huber
>> <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello Utkarsh Rai,
>> >
>> > do we really need a new test program for this test case? I would prefer
>> > add it to an existing test program or add a generic POSIX test program
>> > using the RTEMS Test Framework.
>> >
>> I would also recommend this, or perhaps develop a test for clock
>> monotonic that encompasses several features (as done with clock
>> realtime).
>>
>
> In theory, the clock monotonic test could be the clock realtime one reused
> with the clock type changed. There are a few cases of doing something
> similar.
> The behavior is supposed to be the same for delays.
>
> Missing in this discussion and maybe what Gedare is hinting at is that you
> any sleep/delay/etc type of operation is never specified as a precise
> delay,
> it is a minimum delay. The minimum may be set by clock tick time quantum,
> other threads, processes, etc. The POSIX standard has precise language
> about this for clock_nanosleep. From
> https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/clock_nanosleep.html
>
> "The suspension time caused by this function may be longer than requested
> because the argument value is rounded up to an integer multiple of the
> sleep resolution, or because of the scheduling of other activity by the
> system."
>
> --joel
>
>
>> > On 14/04/2020 19:17, Utkarsh Rai wrote:
>> > > This test checks for a simple 1 ns delay with clock_nanosleep with
>> > > CLOCK_MONOTONIC.
>> > > ---
>> > >   testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am               |  9 +++
>> > >   testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac              |  1 +
>> > >   .../psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c       | 81
>> +++++++++++++++++++
>> > >   .../psxclocknanosleep01.doc                   | 10 +++
>> > >   .../psxclocknanosleep01.scn                   |  3 +
>> > >   5 files changed, 104 insertions(+)
>> > >   create mode 100644 testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
>> > >   create mode 100644
>> testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.doc
>> > >   create mode 100644
>> testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.scn
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > > index 1f9e4233ec..e3918ae7a5 100755
>> > > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
>> > > @@ -321,6 +321,15 @@ psxclockrealtime01_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
>> > >       $(TEST_FLAGS_psxclockrealtime01) $(support_includes)
>> > >   endif
>> > >
>> > > +if TEST_psxclocknanosleep01
>> > > +psx_tests += psxclocknanosleep01
>> > > +psx_screens += psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.scn
>> > > +psx_docs += psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.doc
>> > > +psxclocknanosleep01_SOURCES = psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
>> > > +psxclocknanosleep01_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
>> > > +     $(TEST_FLAGS_psxclocknanosleep01) $(support_includes)
>> > > +endif
>> > > +
>> > >   if TEST_psxconcurrency01
>> > >   psx_tests += psxconcurrency01
>> > >   psx_screens += psxconcurrency01/psxconcurrency01.scn
>> > > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac b/testsuites/psxtests/
>> configure.ac
>> > > index 139787cccb..9bfe8e2c0b 100644
>> > > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
>> > > @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcleanup01])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcleanup02])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclock])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclock01])
>> > > +RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclocknanosleep01])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclockrealtime01])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxconcurrency01])
>> > >   RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcond01])
>> > > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
>> b/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
>> > > new file mode 100644
>> > > index 0000000000..21b738627d
>> > > --- /dev/null
>> > > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
>> > > @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
>> > > +/*
>> > > + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause
>> > > + *
>> > > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Utkarsh Rai
>> > > + *
>> > > + * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
>> > > + * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
>> > > + * are met:
>> > > + * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
>> > > + *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
>> > > + * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
>> copyright
>> > > + *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer
>> in the
>> > > + *    documentation and/or other materials provided with the
>> distribution.
>> > > + *
>> > > + * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND
>> CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS"
>> > > + * AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
>> TO, THE
>> > > + * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A
>> PARTICULAR PURPOSE
>> > > + * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR
>> CONTRIBUTORS BE
>> > > + * LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY,
>> OR
>> > > + * CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT
>> OF
>> > > + * SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR
>> BUSINESS
>> > > + * INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
>> WHETHER IN
>> > > + * CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
>> OTHERWISE)
>> > > + * ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
>> ADVISED OF THE
>> > > + * POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
>> > > + */
>> > > +
>> > > +#include <rtems.h>
>> > > +#include <rtems/test.h>
>> > > +#include <time.h>
>> > > +#include <tmacros.h>
>> > > +
>> > > +/*Forward declaration to avoid compiler warning*/
>> > > +void clock_sleep(void);
>> > Please use a static function instead. Most of these forward declarations
>> > are just lazy warning fixes and bad examples.
>> > > +
>> > > +rtems_task Init(rtems_task_argument ignored);
>> > > +
>> > > +const char rtems_test_name[] = "PSXCLOCKNANOSLEEP 01";
>> > > +
>> > > +void clock_sleep(void)
>> > > +{
>> > > +  struct timespec delay_time;
>> > > +  int    status;
>> > > +
>> > > +  delay_time.tv_sec = 0;
>> > > +  delay_time.tv_nsec = 1;
>> > > +
>> > > +  status=clock_nanosleep( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, 0, &delay_time, (struct
>> timespec* )NULL );
>> > In C code this cast is superfluous, in C++ code using NULL is out dated.
>> > > +  rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
>> > > +}
>> > > +
>> > > +rtems_task Init(rtems_task_argument ignored)
>> > > +{
>> > > +
>> > > +  struct timespec init_time;
>> > > +  struct timespec end_time;
>> > > +  int    status;
>> > > +
>> > > +  TEST_BEGIN();
>> > > +
>> > > +  status = clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &init_time );
>> > > +  rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
>> > > +
>> > > +  clock_sleep();
>> > > +
>> > > +  status = clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &end_time );
>> > > +  rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
>> > > +
>> > > +  rtems_test_assert( (end_time.tv_sec-init_time.tv_sec) == 0 );
>> >
>> > Is end_time.tv_sec - init_time.tv_sec == 0 under all circumstances?
>> >
>> > The test case code should be separated from the test suite boilerplate
>> code.
>> >
>> > > +  rtems_test_assert( (end_time.tv_nsec-init_time.tv_nsec) >=1 );
>> > We really should think about using a C code formatter. I think that I
>> > waste my time telling someone to put spaces between operators.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel at rtems.org
>> > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at rtems.org
>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20200812/a61cf65a/attachment.html>

More information about the devel mailing list