Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-140452-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 13:44:42 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
	Edward Liaw <edliaw@google.com>,
	Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@google.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/timers/posix_timers: reimplement
 check_timer_distribution()
Message-ID: <f0523b3a-ea08-4615-b0fb-5b504a2d39df@sirena.org.uk>
References: <87sf02bgez.ffs@tglx>
 <87r0fmbe65.ffs@tglx>
 <CANDhNCoGRnXLYRzQWpy2ZzsuAXeraqT4R13tHXmiUtGzZRD3gA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o7aqb6uw.ffs@tglx>
 <CANDhNCreA6nJp4ZUhgcxNB5Zye1aySDoU99+_GDS57HAF4jZ_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <87frw2axv0.ffs@tglx>
 <20240404145408.GD7153@redhat.com>
 <87le5t9f14.ffs@tglx>
 <20240406150950.GA3060@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eLEudqFzuEINegTy"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240406150950.GA3060@redhat.com>


--eLEudqFzuEINegTy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 06, 2024 at 05:09:51PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Thomas says:
>=20
> 	The signal distribution test has a tendency to hang for a long
> 	time as the signal delivery is not really evenly distributed. In
> 	fact it might never be distributed across all threads ever in
> 	the way it is written.
>=20
> To me even the
>=20
> 	This primarily tests that the kernel does not favour any one.

Further to my previous mail it's also broken the arm64 selftest builds,
they use kselftest.h with nolibc in order to test low level
functionality mainly used by libc implementations and nolibc doesn't
implement uname():

In file included from za-fork.c:12:
=2E./../kselftest.h:433:17: error: variable has incomplete type 'struct uts=
name'
        struct utsname info;
                       ^
=2E./../kselftest.h:433:9: note: forward declaration of 'struct utsname'
        struct utsname info;
               ^
=2E./../kselftest.h:435:6: error: call to undeclared function 'uname'; ISO =
C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-fun=
ction-declaration]
        if (uname(&info) || sscanf(info.release, "%u.%u.", &major, &minor) =
!=3D 2)
            ^
=2E./../kselftest.h:435:22: error: call to undeclared function 'sscanf'; IS=
O C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-f=
unction-declaration]
        if (uname(&info) || sscanf(info.release, "%u.%u.", &major, &minor) =
!=3D 2)
                            ^
1 warning and 3 errors generated.

--eLEudqFzuEINegTy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmYX2zoACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9BNsAf/SALLRc/9ZAS59tFpxQdRfvXtWqUNgZWj+IKbEwArKB6V0kOSkYeeFF5x
cIP8785Nor1UFY6gBKpNdXwyI1zCLIpX+RwrV2aFJ/DQlcnLfCXvYlPIJ4hVV3DM
LTDs6/MtMx7xXkbyfXRyw+Dy0JuoW7m5l982y1KGI8otoA+Ld/hgbnamNRfrIWd4
GTCAup3fO84OA892aV4hmGgPFHjRuXvCwHg2LLrkFiaGpn9Qz2iJkalIYimZQtuW
sXpV4urnzUybTmMXPRWhj7znL+5BYVPXO83ZtfSq6/jJ60Md5Tg36aazNXpo0H68
OCJR4L+iK4CHAj87DoDQkhVw2BRaUA==
=tp/A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--eLEudqFzuEINegTy--