The reading back of the timer seems relatively recent.
commit b34e243e85dde089dbb84dd6d63dc0fe95b4d504
Author: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jul 8 16:01:04 2020 +0530
syscalls/timer_settime01: Make sure the timer fires
This patch improves the testcase by doing multiple things:
- Make sure the timer fires and catch the signals.
- Verify the values set to the itimerspec by reading them again using
timer_gettime() syscalls.
- Reduce the timer interval, 5 seconds was way too much.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Cyril Hrubis <[email protected]>
That said, we are off by 34 nanoseconds. Not sure that is a strict
requirement to have the alarm be triggered by not more than the value
given. But this is so close, I would hardly designate it as a bug. Add
to it that this is using ABSTIME. There could be a hidden bug here, but
I would bet this is not a regression and it hardly matters much. And it
is not anyone of the two commits referred by the test.
Cascardo.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898633
Title:
timer_settime01 from ubuntu_ltp_syscalls failed on bionic /aws-4.15
on c5.metal
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-kernel-tests/+bug/1898633/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
