Re: kern/59127 (clock_getres(2) returns EINVAL for CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID)

["PHO via gnats" <gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/59127; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: PHO <pho%cielonegro.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, kern-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost,
 netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, riastradh%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/59127 (clock_getres(2) returns EINVAL for
 CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 17:09:44 +0900

 > Does this need pullup-9, pullup-10?
 
 I don't think so, because it was just a missing feature and wasn't 
 really a bug.
 
 > The test case still has an atf_tc_expect_fail.  Why is that?  If the
 > bug is fixed, there should be no atf_tc_expect_fail left.  If the bug
 > is still there, there should be an open PR for it, cited in the
 > atf_tc_expect_fail message.
 
 Because I don't know what to do. Our clock_settime.2 lists two 
 additional clocks CLOCK_VIRTUAL and CLOCK_PROF which neither 
 clock_gettime(2) nor clock_getres(2) support. These syscalls both return 
 EINVAL for these clocks. Do you have any idea why they are listed at all?