From: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 23:18:37 -0700
Subject: selftests/bpf: Fix usleep() implementation
Patch-mainline: v5.7-rc1
Git-commit: 4e1fd25d19e83774e41008c1ca35c6c27eb30270
References: bsc#1177028

nanosleep syscall expects pointer to struct timespec, not nanoseconds
directly. Current implementation fulfills its purpose of invoking nanosleep
syscall, but doesn't really provide sleeping capabilities, which can cause
flakiness for tests relying on usleep() to wait for something.

Fixes: ec12a57b822c ("selftests/bpf: Guarantee that useep() calls nanosleep() syscall")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200313061837.3685572-1-andriin@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Gary Lin <glin@suse.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c |   11 ++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
@@ -35,7 +35,16 @@ struct prog_test_def {
  */
 int usleep(useconds_t usec)
 {
-	return syscall(__NR_nanosleep, usec * 1000UL);
+	struct timespec ts;
+
+	if (usec > 999999) {
+		ts.tv_sec = usec / 1000000;
+		ts.tv_nsec = usec % 1000000;
+	} else {
+		ts.tv_sec = 0;
+		ts.tv_nsec = usec;
+	}
+	return nanosleep(&ts, NULL);
 }
 
 static bool should_run(struct test_selector *sel, int num, const char *name)