[LTP] [PATCh v2] clock_gettime04: print more info to help debugging

[Viresh Kumar]

On 09-03-21, 12:52, Petr Vorel wrote:
> Hi Li, Viresh,
> 
> > On 09-03-21, 08:00, Li Wang wrote:
> > > We catch some sporadically failures[1] like below, but we don't know which
> > > test loop it comes from. So adding more prints to help locate issue.
> 
> > >   tst_test.c:1286: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> > >   vdso_helpers.c:76: TINFO: Couldn't find vdso_gettime64()
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:157: TPASS: CLOCK_REALTIME: Difference between successive readings is reasonable
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:150: TFAIL: CLOCK_REALTIME_COARSE: Difference between successive readings greater than 5 ms (1): 8
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:157: TPASS: CLOCK_MONOTONIC: Difference between successive readings is reasonable
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:150: TFAIL: CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE: Difference between successive readings greater than 5 ms (0): 5
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:157: TPASS: CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW: Difference between successive readings is reasonable
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:157: TPASS: CLOCK_BOOTTIME: Difference between successive readings is reasonable
> 
> > > After patching, it will show more details about the iteration:
> 
> > >   tst_test.c:1288: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> > >   vdso_helpers.c:76: TINFO: Couldn't find vdso_gettime64()
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_REALTIME: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - gettimeofday
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_REALTIME_COARSE: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_MONOTONIC: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:158: TPASS: CLOCK_BOOTTIME: Difference between successive readings is reasonable for following variants:
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO or syscall with libc spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - syscall with old kernel spec
> > >   clock_gettime04.c:162: TINFO:   - vDSO with old kernel spec
> 
> Sorry for putting my opinion late. Instead of repeating variants (duplicity)
> I'd prefer just print variants once at the beginning + print which variant
> failed.

I too thought about that, but then realized that the variant list
isn't same for all the clocks, like gettimeofday only there for
CLOCK_REALTIME and so let it go.

-- 
viresh