On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> tsnorm() is not used at all in signaltest. Remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <joshc@xxxxxx>
> ---
> src/signaltest/signaltest.c | 8 --------
> 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/signaltest/signaltest.c b/src/signaltest/signaltest.c
> index 9454a26..c6d1cfd 100644
> --- a/src/signaltest/signaltest.c
> +++ b/src/signaltest/signaltest.c
> @@ -69,14 +69,6 @@ static int shutdown;
> static int tracelimit = 0;
> static int oldtrace = 0;
>
> -static inline void tsnorm(struct timespec *ts)
> -{
> - while (ts->tv_nsec >= NSEC_PER_SEC) {
> - ts->tv_nsec -= NSEC_PER_SEC;
> - ts->tv_sec++;
> - }
> -}
> -
> static inline long calcdiff(struct timespec t1, struct timespec t2)
> {
> long diff;
> --
> 2.5.0
>
> --
As you can see, many of the programs in this suite are modeled after
cyclictest, but many of them don't unfortunately receive nearly the
amount of testing that cyclictest does. Now the fact that this function
was copied from cyclictest, but not used, sends off alarm bells in my
head. We have various struct timespec in signaltest, could the fact that
we are not calling tsnorm mean that there are some hidden potential
defects? Rather than removing this function, I'd like to spend some time
auditing the use of timespec here until I'm convinced.
Thanks
John
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
