This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: libc-time-clock test doesn't seem to be written correctly??


Brij Bihari Pandey wrote:
Hi,

I have few doubts about
packages/language/c/libc/time/current/tests/clock.c Doesn't look like
that this test will function correctly (as desired by test writers).

- It is quite possible that clock_loop returns "0", as the code there
breaks out in the first iteration of for-loop and it happens more or
less consistently in all the calls to clock_loop. In this case, the
mean value in main will turn out to be zero causing division-by-zero in
err calculation.

It's true that there does seem to be an assumption there, although that assumption has been right before because each call to clock_loop will follow the previous one faster than clock() will increment on virtually all processors. I'll fix it with:
// use mean+1 as divisor to avoid div-by-zero
err = (100 * my_abs(ctrs[i]-mean)) / (mean+1);


Another related thought - shouldn't the analysis of going through valid
 results and comparing against average -- be done using floating point
 arithmetic for mean/err computation and comparision?

Why bother?


- Should test fail on first err value, that is not within TOLERANCE? It
may be better if failure-tolerance (another parameter) is taken on number-of-samples not within TOLERANCE limit, to decide the
test-failure.

If the system disappears into the middle of nowhere for a long time before coming back even once, then something needs investigating. It may be alright, but that's not up to this test to know.


What I gather from the comments in the test, that it tests -
- if clock is working or not, - if it is stable (PASS message) or not.


Am I right in my understading the purpose of this test?

Yes.


Though I don't quite get - - What is meant by stability of clock? - In
what way the nature of test ensures it is testing stability of clock?

Roughly equal period between clock increments.


Jifl
--
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine


-- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]