> -----Original Message----- > From: EXT Ivan Khoronzhuk [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 4:00 PM > To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo); [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [Patch 2/2] validation: schedule: don't check > schedule time on 0 > > > > On 10.09.15 15:21, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: EXT Ivan Khoronzhuk [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 12:49 PM > >> To: [email protected]; Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo); > >> [email protected] > >> Cc: Ivan Khoronzhuk > >> Subject: [lng-odp] [Patch 2/2] validation: schedule: don't check > >> schedule time on 0 > >> > >> The ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT now corresponds to 0, not 1. > >> So no need to check it anymore. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> test/validation/scheduler/scheduler.c | 3 --- > >> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/test/validation/scheduler/scheduler.c > >> b/test/validation/scheduler/scheduler.c > >> index 1874889..94facea 100644 > >> --- a/test/validation/scheduler/scheduler.c > >> +++ b/test/validation/scheduler/scheduler.c > >> @@ -96,9 +96,6 @@ void scheduler_test_wait_time(void) > >> > >> wait_time = odp_schedule_wait_time(0); > > > > This test is OK. > It's even not tested. But I don't touch it in my series. > I can push it with separate patch. > But I tend to add it in this patch like: > CU_ASSERT(wait_time == ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT); > > And rename patch on "correct wait time test" > > is it OK for you? > > > > >> > >> - wait_time = odp_schedule_wait_time(1); > > > > This is OK. > > > >> - CU_ASSERT(wait_time > 0); > > > > This is not. The value returned is implementation specific. > That's why it's deleted. > > > > >> - > >> wait_time = odp_schedule_wait_time((uint64_t)-1LL); > > > > This is OK. > > > >> CU_ASSERT(wait_time > 0); > > > > This is not. The value returned is implementation specific. > Probably better test it here like: > CU_ASSERT(wait_time != ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT); > CU_ASSERT(wait_time != ODP_SCHED_WAIT); > > I'll add it along with proposed test improvements. > Is it OK for you? > > > > > > > So, both asserts should be removed. In addition, wait time should be > tested with a schedule call ... but that's for another patch. > Right. But not here. > Probably with next test like "schedule_wait_time_check" > and test it with time API?
These are correct test cases: // calls don't crash odp_schedule_wait_time(0); odp_schedule_wait_time(1); ... odp_schedule_wait_time(-1); // waits odp_schedule(NULL, ODP_SCHED_WAIT); // doesn't wait odp_schedule(NULL, ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT); // wait at least 'ns' nsec wait_time = odp_schedule_wait_time(ns); odp_schedule(NULL, wait_time); Note that ODP_SCHED_WAIT and ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT - are inputs to odp_schedule() - are not inputs to odp_schedule_wait_time() - are not outputs from odp_schedule_wait_time() From application (API spec) point of view output from odp_schedule_wait_time() is a random value that may or may not match ODP_SCHED_WAIT or ODP_SCHED_NO_WAIT. Application uses odp_schedule_wait_time() only when it needs to wait for a certain time. -Petri > > > -- > Regards, > Ivan Khoronzhuk _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
