Skip to content

uucore: fix time64 build of the process timer - #14496

Open
sylvestre wants to merge 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
sylvestre:time
Open

uucore: fix time64 build of the process timer#14496
sylvestre wants to merge 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
sylvestre:time

Conversation

@sylvestre

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 10, 2026 14:37

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟡 Changes recommended

Add regression coverage for Timer::arm/wait_or_timeout on an affected time64 target.

Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.

Pull request overview

This pull request fixes Unix process-timer initialization for time64 targets.

Changes:

  • Default-initialize timespec values.
  • Populate timer expiration fields afterward.
File summaries
File Summary
src/uucore/src/lib/features/process/unix.rs Updates timer construction for time64 compatibility; regression coverage is still requested.
Review details
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 1
  • Review effort level: Lite

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Comment on lines +236 to 239
let mut time = libc::itimerspec {
it_interval: libc::timespec::default(),
it_value: libc::timespec::default(),
};
@codspeed-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Merging this PR will improve performance by 18.85%

⚠️ Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 1 improved benchmark
✅ 366 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 50 skipped benchmarks1

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
Simulation true_consecutive_calls 350.2 ns 294.7 ns +18.85%

Tip

Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.


Comparing sylvestre:time (df3e017) with main (f604ab9)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 50 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports.

  2. No successful run was found on main (51ed5dc) during the generation of this report, so f604ab9 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/tail/pipe-f is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/tail/tail-n0f is now passing!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants