[LTP] [PATCH v1] Correctly check setitimer params in setitimer01

[Martin Doucha]

Hi,
one small nit below, otherwise:

Reviewed-by: Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>

On 02. 11. 22 15:59, Andrea Cervesato via ltp wrote:
> Last test rewrite didn't consider the right expected boundaries when
> setitimer syscall was tested. We also introduced counter times as
> multiple of clock resolution, to avoid kernel rounding during setitimer
> counter increase.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
> ---
>   .../kernel/syscalls/setitimer/setitimer01.c   | 42 ++++++++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setitimer/setitimer01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setitimer/setitimer01.c
> index f04cb5a69..3fb9250e2 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setitimer/setitimer01.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setitimer/setitimer01.c
> @@ -8,20 +8,21 @@
>   /*\
>    * [Description]
>    *
> - * Check that a setitimer() call pass with timer seting.
> - * Check if signal is generated correctly when timer expiration.
> + * Spaw a child and verify that setitimer() syscall passes and it ends up
> + * counting inside expected boundaries. Then verify from parent that our syscall
> + * sent the correct signal to the child.
>    */
>   
> +#include <time.h>
>   #include <errno.h>
>   #include <sys/time.h>
>   #include <stdlib.h>
>   #include "tst_test.h"
>   #include "lapi/syscalls.h"
> -
> -#define USEC1	10000
> -#define USEC2	20000
> +#include "tst_safe_clocks.h"
>   
>   static struct itimerval *value, *ovalue;
> +static unsigned long time_step;
>   
>   static struct tcase {
>   	int which;
> @@ -55,6 +56,7 @@ static void verify_setitimer(unsigned int i)
>   {
>   	pid_t pid;
>   	int status;
> +	int usec = 3 * time_step;
>   	struct tcase *tc = &tcases[i];
>   
>   	pid = SAFE_FORK();
> @@ -64,14 +66,18 @@ static void verify_setitimer(unsigned int i)
>   
>   		tst_no_corefile(0);
>   
> -		set_setitimer_value(USEC1, 0);
> -		TST_EXP_PASS(sys_setitimer(tc->which, value, NULL));
> +		set_setitimer_value(usec, 0);
> +		TST_EXP_PASS(sys_setitimer(tc->which, value, 0));

Why change the third argument from NULL to 0?

>   
> -		set_setitimer_value(USEC2, USEC2);
> +		set_setitimer_value(5 * time_step, 7 * time_step);
>   		TST_EXP_PASS(sys_setitimer(tc->which, value, ovalue));
>   
> -		if (ovalue->it_value.tv_sec != 0 || ovalue->it_value.tv_usec >= USEC2)
> -			tst_brk(TFAIL, "old timer value is not within the expected range");
> +		tst_res(TINFO, "tv_sec=%ld, tv_usec=%ld",
> +			ovalue->it_value.tv_sec,
> +			ovalue->it_value.tv_usec);
> +
> +		if (ovalue->it_value.tv_sec != 0 || ovalue->it_value.tv_usec > usec)
> +			tst_res(TFAIL, "Ending counters are out of range");
>   
>   		for (;;)
>   			;
> @@ -85,10 +91,26 @@ static void verify_setitimer(unsigned int i)
>   		tst_res(TFAIL, "Child: %s", tst_strstatus(status));
>   }
>   
> +static void setup(void)
> +{
> +	struct timespec res;
> +
> +	SAFE_CLOCK_GETRES(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &res);
> +
> +	time_step = res.tv_nsec / 1000;
> +	if (time_step < 10000)
> +		time_step = 10000;
> +
> +	tst_res(TINFO, "clock resolution: %luns, time step: %luus",
> +		res.tv_nsec,
> +		time_step);
> +}
> +
>   static struct tst_test test = {
>   	.tcnt = ARRAY_SIZE(tcases),
>   	.forks_child = 1,
>   	.test = verify_setitimer,
> +	.setup = setup,
>   	.bufs = (struct tst_buffers[]) {
>   		{&value,  .size = sizeof(struct itimerval)},
>   		{&ovalue, .size = sizeof(struct itimerval)},

-- 
Martin Doucha   mdoucha@suse.cz
QA Engineer for Software Maintenance
SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.
CORSO IIa
Krizikova 148/34
186 00 Prague 8
Czech Republic