Hello Utkarsh Rai,
do we really need a new test program for this test case? I would prefer
add it to an existing test program or add a generic POSIX test program
using the RTEMS Test Framework.
On 14/04/2020 19:17, Utkarsh Rai wrote:
This test checks for a simple 1 ns delay with clock_nanosleep with
CLOCK_MONOTONIC.
---
testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am | 9 +++
testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac | 1 +
.../psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++
.../psxclocknanosleep01.doc | 10 +++
.../psxclocknanosleep01.scn | 3 +
5 files changed, 104 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
create mode 100644
testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.doc
create mode 100644
testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.scn
diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
index 1f9e4233ec..e3918ae7a5 100755
--- a/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
+++ b/testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am
@@ -321,6 +321,15 @@ psxclockrealtime01_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
$(TEST_FLAGS_psxclockrealtime01) $(support_includes)
endif
+if TEST_psxclocknanosleep01
+psx_tests += psxclocknanosleep01
+psx_screens += psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.scn
+psx_docs += psxclocknanosleep01/psxclocknanosleep01.doc
+psxclocknanosleep01_SOURCES = psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
+psxclocknanosleep01_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
+ $(TEST_FLAGS_psxclocknanosleep01) $(support_includes)
+endif
+
if TEST_psxconcurrency01
psx_tests += psxconcurrency01
psx_screens += psxconcurrency01/psxconcurrency01.scn
diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac b/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
index 139787cccb..9bfe8e2c0b 100644
--- a/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
+++ b/testsuites/psxtests/configure.ac
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcleanup01])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcleanup02])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclock])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclock01])
+RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclocknanosleep01])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxclockrealtime01])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxconcurrency01])
RTEMS_TEST_CHECK([psxcond01])
diff --git a/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
b/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..21b738627d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testsuites/psxtests/psxclocknanosleep01/init.c
@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+/*
+ * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2020 Utkarsh Rai
+ *
+ * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
+ * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
+ * are met:
+ * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
+ * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
+ * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
+ * notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
+ * documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
+ *
+ * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS"
+ * AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
+ * IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
+ * ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE
+ * LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR
+ * CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF
+ * SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS
+ * INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN
+ * CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE)
+ * ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE
+ * POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
+ */
+
+#include <rtems.h>
+#include <rtems/test.h>
+#include <time.h>
+#include <tmacros.h>
+
+/*Forward declaration to avoid compiler warning*/
+void clock_sleep(void);
Please use a static function instead. Most of these forward declarations
are just lazy warning fixes and bad examples.
+
+rtems_task Init(rtems_task_argument ignored);
+
+const char rtems_test_name[] = "PSXCLOCKNANOSLEEP 01";
+
+void clock_sleep(void)
+{
+ struct timespec delay_time;
+ int status;
+
+ delay_time.tv_sec = 0;
+ delay_time.tv_nsec = 1;
+
+ status=clock_nanosleep( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, 0, &delay_time, (struct timespec*
)NULL );
In C code this cast is superfluous, in C++ code using NULL is out dated.
+ rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
+}
+
+rtems_task Init(rtems_task_argument ignored)
+{
+
+ struct timespec init_time;
+ struct timespec end_time;
+ int status;
+
+ TEST_BEGIN();
+
+ status = clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &init_time );
+ rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
+
+ clock_sleep();
+
+ status = clock_gettime( CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &end_time );
+ rtems_test_assert( status == 0 );
+
+ rtems_test_assert( (end_time.tv_sec-init_time.tv_sec) == 0 );
Is end_time.tv_sec - init_time.tv_sec == 0 under all circumstances?
The test case code should be separated from the test suite boilerplate code.
+ rtems_test_assert( (end_time.tv_nsec-init_time.tv_nsec) >=1 );
We really should think about using a C code formatter. I think that I
waste my time telling someone to put spaces between operators.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
