[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1418341176.20629.2.camel@ellerman.id.au>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 10:39:36 +1100
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] ftracetest: Replace usleep with sleep 0.000001
On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 14:12 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (2014/12/10 17:19), Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
> >> usleep is a Fedoraism, it's not generally available on Debian based
> >> systems AFAICS.
> >>
> >> GNU sleep accepts a floating point argument, so use that instead.
> >
> > I tested it on busybox not Debian, sorry. But it seems busybox's
> > sleep doesn't support floating point argument..
> >
> > / # ls -l `which sleep`
> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root rooot 7 May 22 2014 /bin/sleep -> busybox
> >
> > / # sleep 0.1
> > sleep: invalid number '0.1'
>
> I also have same result. Basically, ftracetest should be able to run on busybox.
Yeah OK.
> So, I think we'd better check whether usleep is available, and if not, fallback
> to sleep like as below.
>
> if which usleep &> /dev/null; then
> usleep 1
> else
> sleep 0.000001
> fi
Why do we need to call (u)sleep anyway? It's generally a bad sign when tests
use sleep as it's asking for random timing related failures to creep in.
cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists