[PATCH] part of implimenting a monotonic clock in rtems part of this is not the final patch.
zack_on_the_speed_chanel
zack_on_the_speed_chanel at protonmail.ch
Fri Jun 18 02:34:19 UTC 2021
so I tested it with the but I have not made a new test file I'll do that soon. How do I add a new test? All the tests that test the timer functionality do work. I"m confident that all the changes I had to made to implement a monotonic clock should be there.
Thanks
Zack
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, June 15th, 2021 at 7:29 AM, Christian Mauderer <oss at c-mauderer.de> wrote:
> If you add a new functionallity you should add a test that tests the
>
> expected behaviour. You just shouldn't replace one but add a new test or
>
> a new test case to an existing test.
>
> Best regards
>
> Christian
>
> On 14/06/2021 22:18, zack_on_the_speed_chanel wrote:
>
> > also i'll revert the posix test that I changed back to normal because it was only for testing.
> >
> > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> >
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> >
> > On Monday, June 14th, 2021 at 8:14 PM, zack_on_the_speed_chanel zack_on_the_speed_chanel at protonmail.ch wrote:
> >
> > > I've made most of the corrections to the code. I fixed up the formatting but I still don't know if I have to add anything for the settime and delete_timer(). i assume as the monotonic clock only affects the value I think it's all I have to do. I also can try to modify a posix test to check my theory.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Zack
> > >
> > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> > >
> > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > >
> > > On Saturday, June 12th, 2021 at 9:31 AM, Christian Mauderer oss at c-mauderer.de wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Zack,
> > > >
> > > > I don't really know a lot about the timer toppic. So this is more of a
> > > >
> > > > style and general suggestion review.
> > > >
> > > > On 09/06/2021 20:27, zack wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: zack zack_on_the_speed_chanel at protonmail.ch
> > > > >
> > > > > cpukit/include/rtems/posix/timer.h | 6 ++-
> > > > >
> > > > > cpukit/posix/src/psxtimercreate.c | 5 +-
> > > > >
> > > > > cpukit/posix/src/timergettime.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > > >
> > > > > testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer02/psxtimer.c | 26 +++++++---
> > > > >
> > > > > 4 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/posix/timer.h b/cpukit/include/rtems/posix/timer.h
> > > > >
> > > > > index bcbf07a65a..f8cf6115b2 100644
> > > > >
> > > > > --- a/cpukit/include/rtems/posix/timer.h
> > > > >
> > > > > +++ b/cpukit/include/rtems/posix/timer.h
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <rtems/score/objectdata.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <rtems/score/watchdog.h>
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > I think the blank line separated rtems includes from others. So please
> > > >
> > > > don't remove it.
> > > >
> > > > > +#include <time.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <pthread.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > #ifdef __cplusplus
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -47,7 +47,9 @@ typedef struct {
> > > > >
> > > > > struct itimerspec timer_data; /* Timing data of the timer /
> > > > >
> > > > > uint32_t ticks; / Number of ticks of the initialization /
> > > > >
> > > > > uint32_t overrun; / Number of expirations of the timer */
> > > > >
> > > > > - struct timespec time; /* Time at which the timer was started */
> > > > >
> > > > > - struct timespec time; /* Time at which the timer was started */
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what changed in that line. Looks like a whitespace change.
> > > >
> > > > Please avoid these.
> > > >
> > > > > - clockid_t clock_type;
> > > >
> > > > Why a blank line?
> > > >
> > > > > } POSIX_Timer_Control;
> > > > >
> > > > > /**
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/cpukit/posix/src/psxtimercreate.c b/cpukit/posix/src/psxtimercreate.c
> > > > >
> > > > > index a63cf1d100..e78c359bd5 100644
> > > > >
> > > > > --- a/cpukit/posix/src/psxtimercreate.c
> > > > >
> > > > > +++ b/cpukit/posix/src/psxtimercreate.c
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ int timer_create(
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > >
> > > > > POSIX_Timer_Control *ptimer;
> > > > >
> > > > > - if ( clock_id != CLOCK_REALTIME )
> > > > >
> > > > > - if ( clock_id != CLOCK_REALTIME || clock_id != CLOCK_MONOTONIC )
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not sure about that one. It's allways a bit difficult whith these
> > > >
> > > > constructions but I think this one is allways true and therefore will
> > > >
> > > > allways return an error.
> > > >
> > > > Let's assume clock_id is CLOCK_MONOTONIC. In that case (clock_id !=
> > > >
> > > > CLOCK_REALTIME) is true which means that the function will return with
> > > >
> > > > an error. The same works for CLOCK_RREALTIME and the second condition.
> > > >
> > > > If you apply De Morgan to the term you see that
> > > >
> > > > (clock_id != CLOCK_REALTIME || clock_id != CLOCK_MONOTONIC)
> > > >
> > > > is the same as
> > > >
> > > > !(clock_id == CLOCK_REALTIME && clock_id == CLOCK_MONOTONIC)
> > > >
> > > > The two inner comparisons are exclusive. So that won't work.
> > > >
> > > > What you most likely want is a
> > > >
> > > > !(clock_id == CLOCK_REALTIME || clock_id == CLOCK_MONOTONIC)
> > > >
> > > > or with De Morgan again:
> > > >
> > > > (clock_id != CLOCK_REALTIME && clock_id != CLOCK_MONOTONIC)
> > > >
> > > > > rtems_set_errno_and_return_minus_one( EINVAL );
> > > > >
> > > > > if ( !timerid )
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -91,7 +91,8 @@ int timer_create(
> > > > >
> > > > > ptimer->timer_data.it_value.tv_nsec = 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > ptimer->timer_data.it_interval.tv_sec = 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > ptimer->timer_data.it_interval.tv_nsec = 0;
> > > > > -------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > - ptimer->clock_type=clock_id;
> > > > >
> > > > > - _Watchdog_Preinitialize( &ptimer->Timer, _Per_CPU_Get_snapshot() );
> > > > >
> > > > > _Watchdog_Initialize( &ptimer->Timer, _POSIX_Timer_TSR );
> > > > >
> > > > > _Objects_Open_u32(&_POSIX_Timer_Information, &ptimer->Object, 0);
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/cpukit/posix/src/timergettime.c b/cpukit/posix/src/timergettime.c
> > > > >
> > > > > index ee2a566f0e..62011cde58 100644
> > > > >
> > > > > --- a/cpukit/posix/src/timergettime.c
> > > > >
> > > > > +++ b/cpukit/posix/src/timergettime.c
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <rtems/score/todimpl.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <rtems/score/watchdogimpl.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > #include <rtems/seterr.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > +#include <rtems/timespec.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > /*
> > > > >
> > > > > - - When a timer is initialized, the value of the time in
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -43,21 +44,67 @@ int timer_gettime(
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > >
> > > > > POSIX_Timer_Control *ptimer;
> > > > >
> > > > > ISR_lock_Context lock_context;
> > > > >
> > > > > - uint64_t now;
> > > > >
> > > > > uint32_t remaining;
> > > > >
> > > > > - Per_CPU_Control *cpu;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - struct timespec * now; // get time now either with
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - struct timespec * expire; // expire
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - struct timespec * result;// get remaining time
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if ( !value )
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_set_errno_and_return_minus_one( EINVAL );
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_set_errno_and_return_minus_one( EINVAL );
> > > > >
> > > > > ptimer = _POSIX_Timer_Get( timerid, &lock_context );
> > > > >
> > > > > - if ( ptimer != NULL ) {
> > > > >
> > > > > - Per_CPU_Control *cpu;
> > > > >
> > > > > - if(ptimer== NULL ){
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Style: There should be a space before the ==
> > > >
> > > > > - rtems_set_errno_and_return_minus_one( EINVAL );
> > > > > - }
> > > > >
> > > > > +if ( ptimer->clock_type ==CLOCK_REALTIME) {
> > > >
> > > > Style again: Space after ==
> > > >
> > > > Why that many blank lines?
> > > >
> > > > > - cpu = _POSIX_Timer_Acquire_critical( ptimer, &lock_context );
> > > > >
> > > > > - _TOD_Get(now); // get current time
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_timespec_from_ticks (ptimer->Timer.expire,expire ); // get the time to expire
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That are C++ style comments. We normally have C-Style comments in RTEMS
> > > >
> > > > only. Beneath that the comments exceed the line length. And some of them
> > > >
> > > > are quite superflous. A _TOD_Get(now) doesn't need any comment. The line
> > > >
> > > > is already telling that.
> > > >
> > > > Again: Blank lines. I won't mention the further blank lines below!
> > > >
> > > > > - if (now->tv_nsec+now->tv_sec > expire->tv_nsec+expire->tv_sec) { // check if the time expired
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_timespec_subtract (now ,expire , result); //
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Empty comment at the end of the line?
> > > >
> > > > > - remaining = (uint32_t) result->tv_nsec+result->tv_sec;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - } else {
> > > > >
> > > > > - remaining = 0;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - }
> > > > >
> > > > > - _Timespec_From_ticks( remaining, &value->it_value );
> > > > >
> > > > > - value->it_interval = ptimer->timer_data.it_interval;
> > > > >
> > > > > - _POSIX_Timer_Release( cpu, &lock_context );
> > > > >
> > > > > - return 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > - }
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +if ( ptimer->clock_type ==CLOCK_MONOTONIC) {
> > > >
> > > > Odd indentation and missing blank before the closing bracket.
> > > >
> > > > Indentation and some blanks on brackets seems to be a problem on quite
> > > >
> > > > some more lines too.
> > > >
> > > > > - cpu = _POSIX_Timer_Acquire_critical( ptimer, &lock_context );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - now = cpu->Watchdog.ticks;
> > > > >
> > > > > - _Timecounter_Nanouptime(now );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_timespec_from_ticks (ptimer->Timer.expire,expire );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - if (now->tv_nsec+now->tv_sec > expire->tv_nsec+expire->tv_sec) {
> > > > >
> > > > > - rtems_timespec_subtract (now, expire, result);
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - if ( now < ptimer->Timer.expire ) {
> > > > >
> > > > > - remaining = (uint32_t) ( ptimer->Timer.expire - now );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - remaining = (uint32_t) result->tv_nsec+result->tv_sec;
> > > > > } else {
> > > > > remaining = 0;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer02/psxtimer.c b/testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer02/psxtimer.c
> > > > >
> > > > > index 9f79d33c42..029e638c76 100644
> > > > >
> > > > > --- a/testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer02/psxtimer.c
> > > > >
> > > > > +++ b/testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer02/psxtimer.c
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -59,17 +59,31 @@ void *POSIX_Init (
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad clock id" );
> > > > >
> > > > > puts( "timer_create - bad timer id pointer - EINVAL" );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_REALTIME, &event, NULL );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &event, NULL );
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad timer id" );
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems that you replace the test for REALTIME timers. Are they no
> > > >
> > > > longer supported with your changes? I'm not sure whether that is a good
> > > >
> > > > idea because it would break all existing applications that use REALTIME
> > > >
> > > > timer.
> > > >
> > > > > puts( "timer_create - OK" );
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_REALTIME, NULL, &timer );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, NULL, &timer );
> > > > >
> > > > > posix_service_failed( status, "timer_create OK" );
> > > > >
> > > > > puts( "timer_create - too many - EAGAIN" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_REALTIME, NULL, &timer1 );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, NULL, &timer1 );
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EAGAIN, "too many" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - puts( "timer_create (monotonic) - bad timer id pointer - EINVAL" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &event, NULL );
> > > > >
> > > > > - fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad timer id" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - puts( "timer_create (Monotonic) - OK" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, NULL, &timer );
> > > > >
> > > > > - posix_service_failed( status, "timer_create OK" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - puts( "timer_create (monotonic)- too many - EAGAIN" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - status = timer_create( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, NULL, &timer1 );
> > > > >
> > > > > - fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EAGAIN, "too many" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - puts( "timer_delete - bad id - EINVAL" );
> > > > >
> > > > > status = timer_delete( timer1 + 1 );
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad id" );
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -100,14 +114,14 @@ void *POSIX_Init (
> > > > >
> > > > > status = timer_settime( timer, TIMER_ABSTIME, &itimer, NULL );
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad itimer value #2" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - clock_gettime( CLOCK_REALTIME, &now );
> > > > >
> > > > > - clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &now );
> > > > >
> > > > > itimer.it_value = now;
> > > > >
> > > > > itimer.it_value.tv_sec = itimer.it_value.tv_sec - 1;
> > > > >
> > > > > puts( "timer_settime - bad itimer value - previous time - EINVAL" );
> > > > >
> > > > > status = timer_settime( timer, TIMER_ABSTIME, &itimer, NULL );
> > > > >
> > > > > fatal_posix_service_status_errno( status, EINVAL, "bad itimer value #3" );
> > > > >
> > > > > - clock_gettime( CLOCK_REALTIME, &now );
> > > > >
> > > > > - clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &now );
> > > > >
> > > > > itimer.it_value = now;
> > > > >
> > > > > itimer.it_value.tv_sec = itimer.it_value.tv_sec + 1;
> > > > >
> > > > > puts( "timer_settime - bad id - EINVAL" );
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -129,4 +143,4 @@ void *POSIX_Init (
> > > > >
> > > > > TEST_END();
> > > > >
> > > > > rtems_test_exit (0);
> > > > >
> > > > > -}
> > > > >
> > > > > +}
> > > > >
> > > > > \ No newline at end of file
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > devel mailing list
> > > >
> > > > devel at rtems.org
> > > >
> > > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
More information about the devel
mailing list