Merge request https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103 was reviewed by Gedare Bloom
-- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149078 > > - build_time( &time, 12, 31, 2000, 23, 59, 59, 0 ); > + build_time( &time, 12, 31, 1991, 23, 59, 59, 0 ); why changing this one? -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149079 > > - build_time( &time, 12, 31, 4095, 23, 59, 59, 0 ); > + build_time( &time, 12, 31, 2000, 23, 59, 59, 0 ); ditto -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149080 > - build_time( &time, 1, 1, 4096, 0, 0, 0, 0 ); > + /* Additional future year checks */ > + delete -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149081 > - fatal_directive_status( status, RTEMS_INVALID_CLOCK, "rtems_clock_set" ); > - print_time( "TA1 - rtems_clock_set - ", &time, " - RTEMS_INVALID_CLOCK\n" > ); > + directive_failed(status, "rtems_clock_set"); // expect SUCCESS keep these similar to the other blocks. -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149082 > > - build_time( &time, 12, 31, 1991, 23, 59, 59, 0 ); > + build_time( &time, 3, 1, 2200, 0, 0, 0, 0 ); I don't think this one is needed -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149083 > + print_time( "TA1 - rtems_clock_get_tod - ", &time, " - > RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL\n" ); > + > + build_time( &time, 3, 1, 3000, 0, 0, 0, 0 ); I don't think this is adding anything special? I guess if we wanted something, we should test for 2800 as that's the next weird year? And probably year 4000 too. -- Gedare Bloom started a new discussion on testsuites/sptests/spclock_err02/init.c: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103#note_149084 > + status = rtems_clock_get_tod( &time ); > + directive_failed( status, "rtems_clock_get_tod" ); > + print_time( "TA1 - rtems_clock_get_tod - ", &time, " - > RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL\n" ); These tests would be more useful if they assert the value of the TOD after waking up, @joel ? -- View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1103 You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.
_______________________________________________ bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs
