Re: [PATCH 09/16] selftests: timers: nanosleep: Explicitly list the tested clocks

[Thomas Weißschuh (Schneider Electric)]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 12:20:31PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 11:47 PM Thomas Weißschuh (Schneider Electric)
> <thomas.weissschuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.

I'll update the commit message to mention this.

> > Use an equivalent, explicit list instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh (Schneider Electric) <thomas.weissschuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Otherwise,
> Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks!