On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:55:45PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > On 1.12.2017 23:44, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 10:07:54AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> On 12/01/2017 08:19 AM, Michal Simek wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On 1.12.2017 16:06, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 12/01/2017 03:46 PM, Michal Simek wrote: > >>>>> Qemu for arm32/arm64 has a problem with time setup. > >>>> > >>>> Wouldn't it be preferable to fix the root cause? > >>> > >>> Definitely that would be the best and IIRC I have tried to convince our > >>> qemu guy to do that but they have never done that. > >> > >> What is the exact failure condition? Is it simply that the test is still > >> slightly too strict about which delays it accepts, or is sleep outright > >> broken? > >> > >> You can use command-line option -k to avoid some tests. For example "-k not > >> sleep". That way, we don't have to hard-code the dependency into the test > >> source. Depending on the root cause (issue in U-Boot, or issue in just your > >> local version of qemu, or something that will never work) this might be > >> better? > > > > Even with the most recent relaxing of the sleep test requirements, I can > > still (depending on overall system load) have 'sleep' take too long, on > > QEMU. I think it might have been half a second slow, but I don't have > > the log handy anymore. Both locally and in travis we -k not sleep all > > of the qemu instances. > > ok. By locally do you mean just using -k not sleep?
Yes, I have that in my CI scripts and similar. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
