From f40ca0ff9f128b2db0a9724e3f493326d1c1388c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: winlin Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 10:31:22 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Fix StUtimePerformance utest randomly failed. --- trunk/src/utest/srs_utest_st.cpp | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/trunk/src/utest/srs_utest_st.cpp b/trunk/src/utest/srs_utest_st.cpp index 5b91b17ad..1ddf55a21 100644 --- a/trunk/src/utest/srs_utest_st.cpp +++ b/trunk/src/utest/srs_utest_st.cpp @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ VOID TEST(StTest, StUtimePerformance) // Both the st_utime(clock_gettime or gettimeofday) and gettimeofday's // elpased time to execute is dependence on whether it is the first time be called. // In general, the gettimeofday has better performance, but the gap between - // them is really small, maybe less than 10 clock ~ 10 microseconds. + // them is really small, maybe less than 30 clock ~ 30 microseconds. // check st_utime first, then gettimeofday { @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ VOID TEST(StTest, StUtimePerformance) EXPECT_GE(st_utime_elapsed_time, 0); // pass the test, if - EXPECT_LT(gettimeofday_elapsed_time > st_utime_elapsed_time ? gettimeofday_elapsed_time - st_utime_elapsed_time : st_utime_elapsed_time - gettimeofday_elapsed_time, 10); + EXPECT_LT(gettimeofday_elapsed_time > st_utime_elapsed_time ? gettimeofday_elapsed_time - st_utime_elapsed_time : st_utime_elapsed_time - gettimeofday_elapsed_time, 30); } // check gettimeofday first, then st_utime @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ VOID TEST(StTest, StUtimePerformance) EXPECT_GE(gettimeofday_elapsed_time, 0); EXPECT_GE(st_utime_elapsed_time, 0); - EXPECT_LT(gettimeofday_elapsed_time > st_utime_elapsed_time ? gettimeofday_elapsed_time - st_utime_elapsed_time : st_utime_elapsed_time - gettimeofday_elapsed_time, 10); + EXPECT_LT(gettimeofday_elapsed_time > st_utime_elapsed_time ? gettimeofday_elapsed_time - st_utime_elapsed_time : st_utime_elapsed_time - gettimeofday_elapsed_time, 30); } // compare st_utime & gettimeofday in a loop