On Wed, Feb 15, 2023, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Hi Anish,
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 01:16:07AM +0000, Anish Moorthy wrote:
> > Currently we're dividing tv_nsec by 1E8, not 1E9.
> >
> > Reported-by: James Houghton <jthoughton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > index b0e1fc4de9e29..6809184ce2390 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/demand_paging_test.c
> > @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ static void run_test(enum vm_guest_mode mode, void *arg)
> > ts_diff.tv_sec, ts_diff.tv_nsec);
> > pr_info("Overall demand paging rate: %f pgs/sec\n",
> > memstress_args.vcpu_args[0].pages * nr_vcpus /
> > - ((double)ts_diff.tv_sec + (double)ts_diff.tv_nsec / 100000000.0));
> > + ((double)ts_diff.tv_sec + (double)ts_diff.tv_nsec / 1E9));
>
> Use NSEC_PER_SEC instead so the conversion taking place is immediately
> obvious.
And please post this separately, it's a fix that's independent of the rest of the
series and can/should be applied sooner than later.
Thanks!
