Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-22 Thread Shuah Khan 
On 01/22/2016 12:54 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>>> David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
>>> changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
>>> when used with ADJ_NANO.
>>>
>>> I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
>>> more unit tests to validate these going forward.
>>>
>>> Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
>>>
>>> Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
>>> if you'd prefer.
>>
>> Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
>> this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
>> after merge window closes.
> 
> We really should not delay selftests, especially if they have been written
> along with a fix for a recently detected problem.
> 

Thomas,

Yes. That is why I have "probably" in my response.
Could you please fold this test in with your urgent
fix, so they can go in together.

Acked-by: Shuah Khan 

thanks,
-- Shuah

-- 
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shua...@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-22 Thread Shuah Khan 
On 01/22/2016 12:54 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>>> David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
>>> changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
>>> when used with ADJ_NANO.
>>>
>>> I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
>>> more unit tests to validate these going forward.
>>>
>>> Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
>>>
>>> Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
>>> if you'd prefer.
>>
>> Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
>> this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
>> after merge window closes.
> 
> We really should not delay selftests, especially if they have been written
> along with a fix for a recently detected problem.
> 

Thomas,

Yes. That is why I have "probably" in my response.
Could you please fold this test in with your urgent
fix, so they can go in together.

Acked-by: Shuah Khan 

thanks,
-- Shuah

-- 
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shua...@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread Thomas Gleixner 
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
> > changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
> > when used with ADJ_NANO.
> > 
> > I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
> > more unit tests to validate these going forward.
> > 
> > Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
> > 
> > Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
> > if you'd prefer.
> 
> Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
> this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
> after merge window closes.

We really should not delay selftests, especially if they have been written
along with a fix for a recently detected problem.

Thanks,

tglx

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread Shuah Khan 
On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
> changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
> when used with ADJ_NANO.
> 
> I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
> more unit tests to validate these going forward.
> 
> Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
> 
> Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
> if you'd prefer.

Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
after merge window closes.

thanks,
-- Shuah


-- 
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shua...@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978

[PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread John Stultz 
David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
when used with ADJ_NANO.

I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
more unit tests to validate these going forward.

Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?

Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
if you'd prefer.

Let me know if you have any thoughts or objections!

thanks
-john


Cc: Sasha Levin 
Cc: Richard Cochran 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: Prarit Bhargava 
Cc: Harald Hoyer 
Cc: Kay Sievers 
Cc: David Herrmann 
Cc: Shuah Khan 

John Stultz (2):
  ntp: Fix ADJ_SETOFFSET being used w/ ADJ_NANO
  kselftests: timers: Add adjtimex SETOFFSET validity tests

 kernel/time/ntp.c   |  14 ++-
 tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c | 139 +++-
 2 files changed, 150 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread John Stultz 
David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
when used with ADJ_NANO.

I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
more unit tests to validate these going forward.

Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?

Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
if you'd prefer.

Let me know if you have any thoughts or objections!

thanks
-john


Cc: Sasha Levin 
Cc: Richard Cochran 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: Prarit Bhargava 
Cc: Harald Hoyer 
Cc: Kay Sievers 
Cc: David Herrmann 
Cc: Shuah Khan 

John Stultz (2):
  ntp: Fix ADJ_SETOFFSET being used w/ ADJ_NANO
  kselftests: timers: Add adjtimex SETOFFSET validity tests

 kernel/time/ntp.c   |  14 ++-
 tools/testing/selftests/timers/valid-adjtimex.c | 139 +++-
 2 files changed, 150 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread Shuah Khan 
On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
> changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
> when used with ADJ_NANO.
> 
> I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
> more unit tests to validate these going forward.
> 
> Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
> 
> Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
> if you'd prefer.

Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
after merge window closes.

thanks,
-- Shuah


-- 
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shua...@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix for ADJ_SETOFFSET w/ ADJ_NANO

2016-01-21 Thread Thomas Gleixner 
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/21/2016 04:03 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > David Herrmann mailed me pointing out that one of the
> > changes that landed in 4.5-rc broke users of ADJ_SETOFFSET
> > when used with ADJ_NANO.
> > 
> > I've implemented a fix to this issue and also introduced
> > more unit tests to validate these going forward.
> > 
> > Thomas: Can you queue the first patch for tip/timers/urgent?
> > 
> > Shuah: The kselftests patch can wait to the next merge window
> > if you'd prefer.
> 
> Yeah. Probably it has to wait until the next merge window as
> this is a new test. I can pull this into linux-kselftest next
> after merge window closes.

We really should not delay selftests, especially if they have been written
along with a fix for a recently detected problem.

Thanks,

tglx