On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 05:01:41PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
This is used in various selftests and will be handy when integrating those with nolibc.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de
tools/include/nolibc/time.h | 7 +++++++ tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c | 1 + 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/include/nolibc/time.h b/tools/include/nolibc/time.h index 28a1549adb14e2087fa8fbdb7e9c35e1c3f22c2a..760133c574ece97165e3bba5616a387deaf07aff 100644 --- a/tools/include/nolibc/time.h +++ b/tools/include/nolibc/time.h @@ -105,6 +105,13 @@ int clock_settime(clockid_t clockid, struct timespec *tp) } +static __inline__ +double difftime(time_t time1, time_t time2) +{
- return time1 - time2;
+}
Thanks for making me discover difftime(). I've never heard about it, and seeing it return a double looks totally weird, but that's how it is indeed.
In case time_t would be unsigned, this would return a large unsigned value. I think it could be more robust to explicitly cast the two inputs to long:
return (long)time1 - (long)time2;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c index aed71de4b4f3dd1f183c7fc25e5a5cee466600ed..fd8bab42e75157967658690005bc9142360fc135 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c @@ -1423,6 +1423,7 @@ int run_stdlib(int min, int max) CASE_TEST(toupper_noop); EXPECT_EQ(1, toupper('A'), 'A'); break; CASE_TEST(abs); EXPECT_EQ(1, abs(-10), 10); break; CASE_TEST(abs_noop); EXPECT_EQ(1, abs(10), 10); break;
CASE_TEST(difftime); EXPECT_EQ(1, difftime(200., 100.), 100.); break;
Then here maybe test it in reverse to make sure the types don't cause trouble:
CASE_TEST(difftime); EXPECT_EQ(1, difftime(100., 200.), -100.); break;
Willy