Hi, (Re-ping regarding previous mail.)
Does anyone have an idea regarding if the psxtimer01 test can be expected to report a time difference as described below, or if this is something that is not expected and should be treated as a valid test failure? (Please also see related patch.) -- Martin Erik Werner <martinerikwerner....@gmail.com> ÅAC Microtec AB | Clyde Space Ltd. On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 11:21 +0200, Martin Erik Werner wrote: > When running the testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer01/ tests on our or1k > board, I've noticed a common 10ms (one clock tick) time difference when > measuring the re-armed time value in task A and C, which causes the > posixtimer01 test to report failure: > > (...) > if (sigwait(&set,&received_sig) == -1) { > perror ("Error in sigwait\n"); > } > if (timer_gettime(timer_id, &timerdata) == -1) { > perror ("Error in timer_gettime\n"); > rtems_test_exit(0); > } > if (! _Timespec_Equal_to( &timerdata.it_value, &my_period )){ > perror ("Error in Task A timer_gettime\n"); > } > (...) > > Given that this time value check is disabled in task B: > > #if 0 > /* > * It is not an error if they are not equal. A clock tick could occur > * and thus they are close but not equal. Can we test for this? > */ > if ( !_Timespec_Equal_to( &timerdata.it_value, &my_period) ){ > printf( "NOT EQUAL %d:%d != %d:%d\n", > timerdata.it_value.tv_sec, > timerdata.it_value.tv_nsec, > my_period.tv_sec, > my_period.tv_nsec > ); > rtems_test_exit(0); > } > #endif > > does this check still belong as a certain failure in task A and C? > > I've made a modification to the failure printout in order to avoid using unset > errno, and to provide information about the time difference, which might be > interesting, if these checks are still valid as certain failures: > > Martin Erik Werner (1): > Fix and extend error message in posix timer test > > testsuites/psxtests/psxtimer01/psxtimer.c | 14 ++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel