[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC PATCH-for-5.1?] tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test: Skip test if na
From: |
Laurent Vivier |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC PATCH-for-5.1?] tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test: Skip test if nanosleep missing (Travis) |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:24:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 |
Le 21/07/2020 à 13:38, Laurent Vivier a écrit :
> Le 21/07/2020 à 10:57, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé a écrit :
>> The time test sometimes fails on Travis-CI [*]:
>>
>> TEST linux-test on aarch64
>> tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c:237: nanosleep
>> make[2]: *** [run-linux-test] Error 1
>> make: *** [run-tcg-tests-aarch64-linux-user] Error 2
>>
>> As this seems due to a container limitation on Travis-CI,
>> simply skip the test there.
>>
>> [*] https://travis-ci.org/github/qemu/qemu/jobs/710005078#L3706
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
>> ---
>> RFC because per Laurent Vivier we are not using the correct libc
>> while cross-linking the test (maybe change in the container
>> packages?)
>> ---
>> tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c | 7 ++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c
>> b/tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c
>> index 8a7c15cd31..c7dfdec9ec 100644
>> --- a/tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c
>> +++ b/tests/tcg/multiarch/linux-test.c
>> @@ -233,8 +233,13 @@ static void test_time(void)
>> ts.tv_sec = 0;
>> ts.tv_nsec = 20 * 1000000;
>> chk_error(nanosleep(&ts, &rem));
>> - if (rem.tv_sec != 1)
>> + if (rem.tv_sec != 1) {
>> + if (getenv("TRAVIS_ARCH")) {
>> + printf("nanosleep missing? skipping 'time' test\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> error("nanosleep");
>> + }
>> chk_error(gettimeofday(&tv2, NULL));
>> ti = tv2.tv_sec - tv.tv_sec;
>> if (ti >= 2)
>>
>
> Well, in the end I think the problem is in linux-user:
>
> We copy the "rem" structure even if there is no error, so "1" is
> overwritten.
>
> We don't have the problem on all architectures because some use
> nanosleep() syscall (that is correct) others use clock_nanosleep()
> syscall that is not correct.
>
> This should fix the problem:
>
> diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
> index 1211e759c26c..130005716ece 100644
> --- a/linux-user/syscall.c
> +++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
> @@ -11831,7 +11831,7 @@ static abi_long do_syscall1(void *cpu_env, int
> num, abi_long arg1,
> target_to_host_timespec(&ts, arg3);
> ret = get_errno(safe_clock_nanosleep(arg1, arg2,
> &ts, arg4 ? &ts : NULL));
> - if (arg4)
> + if (is_error(ret) && arg4)
> host_to_target_timespec(arg4, &ts);
>
> #if defined(TARGET_PPC)
According to clock_nanosleep(2) it should be in fact:
diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
index 1211e759c26c..63e7cd8947e5 100644
--- a/linux-user/syscall.c
+++ b/linux-user/syscall.c
@@ -11831,8 +11831,9 @@ static abi_long do_syscall1(void *cpu_env, int
num, abi_long arg1,
target_to_host_timespec(&ts, arg3);
ret = get_errno(safe_clock_nanosleep(arg1, arg2,
&ts, arg4 ? &ts : NULL));
- if (arg4)
+ if (ret == -TARGET_EINTR && arg4 && arg2 != TIMER_ABSTIME) {
host_to_target_timespec(arg4, &ts);
+ }
#if defined(TARGET_PPC)
/* clock_nanosleep is odd in that it returns positive errno values.