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

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