On 04/19/2013 01:44 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi!
>>  #if defined UCLINUX && !__THROW
>>  /* workaround for libc bug causing failure in sys/timex.h */
>> @@ -74,20 +35,19 @@
>>  #include "test.h"
>>  #include "usctest.h"
>>
>> -#define SET_MODE ( ADJ_OFFSET | ADJ_FREQUENCY | ADJ_MAXERROR | ADJ_ESTERROR 
>> | \
>> -    ADJ_STATUS | ADJ_TIMECONST | ADJ_TICK )
>> +#define SET_MODE (ADJ_OFFSET | ADJ_FREQUENCY | ADJ_MAXERROR | ADJ_ESTERROR 
>> | \
>> +    ADJ_STATUS | ADJ_TIMECONST | ADJ_TICK)
>>
>> -static void setup();
>> -static void cleanup();
>> +static void setup(void);
>> +static void cleanup(void);
>>
>>  char *TCID = "adjtimex01";
>> -int TST_TOTAL = 1;
>> +int TST_TOTAL = 2;
>>
>>  static struct timex tim_save;
>>
>>  int main(int ac, char **av)
>>  {
>> -
>>      int lc;
>>      char *msg;
>>
>> @@ -106,7 +66,26 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>>              TEST(adjtimex(&tim_save));
>>
>>              if ((TEST_RETURN >= 0) && (TEST_RETURN <= 5)) {
>> -                    tst_resm(TPASS, "adjtimex() returned %ld", TEST_RETURN);
>> +                    tst_resm(TPASS, "adjtimex() with mode %u returned %ld",
>> +                             SET_MODE, TEST_RETURN);
>> +            } else {
>> +                    tst_resm(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "Test Failed, adjtimex()"
>> +                             "returned %ld", TEST_RETURN);
>> +            }
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) {
>> +
>> +            tst_count = 0;
>> +
>> +            /* Call adjtimex(2) */
>> +            tim_save.modes = ADJ_OFFSET_SINGLESHOT;
>> +
>> +            TEST(adjtimex(&tim_save));
>> +
>> +            if ((TEST_RETURN >= 0) && (TEST_RETURN <= 5)) {
>> +                    tst_resm(TPASS, "adjtimex() with mode %u returned %ld",
>> +                             ADJ_OFFSET_SINGLESHOT, TEST_RETURN);
>>              } else {
>>                      tst_resm(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "Test Failed, adjtimex()"
>>                               "returned %ld", TEST_RETURN);
> 
> I think that doing the test loop twice would fail at least for '-i' and
> '-I'. My guess is that the second loop would not be exectuted at all.

Thanks for reviewing.
Actually, it works well for '-i' since 'lc' was resetted to 0 at the second 
loop.
The problem is that for '-I', the first loop use up time specified, causing the 
second
is not executed.

I'll send V2 to fix it.
> 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced
analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building
apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use
our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to