-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 604
testing/ostest: add test case for task priority change with locked scheduler #1711
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
ce67d71
to
e96e26c
Compare
e96e26c
to
26d08ed
Compare
c3c4e46
to
c79b76d
Compare
8c2c2a3
to
bf4ee4e
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pkarashchenko this looks fine. But I have a general comment about the os tests: I would like to see an short explanation of what the test method is and what is expected. Some times I find this lost in clever code.
Ok. Could you please point me to some examples, or should I just place some explanations in the comments? |
Currently this is blocked by #1716 |
@pkarashchenko please rebase your patch |
Continuing what @davids5 was saying, I think a comment in the code that explains the purpose of the test and what we expect from it will help people reading the code later. Separately, another idea: Since the test is expected to fail due to a bug, I think we should modify the ostest program to tally five possible results from each test, like some other test suites do: pass, fail, expected fail, unexpected pass, skipped. Explanation:
|
@pkarashchenko please add commit message describing the change |
bf4ee4e
to
ff8ec6f
Compare
Should I modify all the three commits? I'm not sure that commit that adds missing comment needs any other description than |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pkarashchenko Thank you
ff8ec6f
to
a766a26
Compare
a766a26
to
40c45ae
Compare
40c45ae
to
66c68dc
Compare
92ed856
to
81d97e4
Compare
Seems like apache/nuttx#9981 is needed to move forward |
f05b9e3
to
81d97e4
Compare
@xiaoxiang781216 do you have any ideas why
But on CI the |
@ttnie could you check why the citest fail? |
@xiaoxiang781216 seems this should fix the root cause apache/nuttx#10016 |
without SIM_WALLTIME_SIGNAL, simulator timing doesn't sync with the PC wall clock. I guess the ci server either run to fast or slow than your PC. |
81d97e4
to
c0dbfc3
Compare
Signed-off-by: Petro Karashchenko <[email protected]>
…heduler Signed-off-by: Petro Karashchenko <[email protected]>
…EEP=y Signed-off-by: Petro Karashchenko <[email protected]>
c0dbfc3
to
d1a5318
Compare
Summary
This test helps to verify that scheduler lock/unlock functionality is working as expected.
Currently there is a bug, so test fails.
Impact
More test coverage
Testing
The test pass if apache/nuttx#7464 is applied