Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230706032257.1662-1-duminjie@vivo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230706032257.1662-1-duminjie@vivo.com>
From:   John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jul 2023 20:46:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CANDhNCoJ2ZjGCY3yZ3K4XZF8-bNTExOUWNkqWtJ2FZW=bYFwzw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] tools: timers: fix freq average calculation
To:     Minjie Du <duminjie@vivo.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        "open list:TIMEKEEPING, CLOCKSOURCE CORE, NTP, ALARMTIMER" 
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, opensource.kernel@vivo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 8:23=E2=80=AFPM Minjie Du <duminjie@vivo.com> wrote:
>
> Delete a duplicate assignment from this function implementation.
> The note means ppm is average of the two actual freq samples.
> But ppm have a duplicate assignment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Minjie Du <duminjie@vivo.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/timers/raw_skew.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/raw_skew.c b/tools/testing/se=
lftests/timers/raw_skew.c
> index 5beceeed0..6eba203f9 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/raw_skew.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/timers/raw_skew.c
> @@ -129,8 +129,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>         printf("%lld.%i(est)", eppm/1000, abs((int)(eppm%1000)));
>
>         /* Avg the two actual freq samples adjtimex gave us */
> -       ppm =3D (tx1.freq + tx2.freq) * 1000 / 2;
> -       ppm =3D (long long)tx1.freq * 1000;
> +       ppm =3D (long long)(tx1.freq + tx2.freq) * 1000 / 2;

Huh. So yeah, I looked back in my own history and this has been there
forever. I'm guessing I was intending to average the two samples and
then due to reasons I can't remember decided to just use the first in
the short-term for some debugging (with the second assignment) and
committed both.

I think it should be safe, because if the freq values are not the same
the test will return SKIP, so it's unlikely changing this would cause
new test failures.

Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>

Thanks for noticing this and sending this out!
-john