On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 11:47 PM Thomas Weißschuh (Schneider Electric) <[email protected]> wrote: > > The test relies on the numeric values of the clockids. > As not all clocks are meant to be tested, this requires skipping some > clocks unconditionally, cluttering the result.
My only nit here is that there are some clocks the previous code explicitly skips (_CPUTIME_IDs), and others that are skipped as they just don't support nanosleep (the _RAW and _COARSE ids) and return the proper error. It might be helpful to clarify in the commit message this distinction so its clear this commit isn't just forgetting the _RAW and _COARSE ids. > Use an equivalent, explicit list instead. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh (Schneider Electric) > <[email protected]> Otherwise, Acked-by: John Stultz <[email protected]> thanks -john
