This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-patches
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2), pthread_condattr_[gs]etclock(3)
On Jul 21 13:59, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-07-21 at 11:35 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jul 21 11:21, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > No, you're not at all off-base. Personally I'd prefer to use the native
> > > NT timer functions, but that's not important.
>
> No problem, that's something I keep forgetting about.
>
> > > What I'm missing is a way to specify relative vs. absolute timeouts in
> > > your above sketch. I guess we need a flag argument as well.
>
> Working on this last night, I decided to make the timeout a LONGLONG of
> 100ns units instead, positive for absolute and negative for relative.
Good idea. The value can be immediately used in NtSetTimer and it
can be used for testing.
> > Btw., if you call NtQueryTimer right before NtCancelTimer, then you get
> > the remaining time for free to return to clock_nanosleep. It would
> > be nice if NtQueryTimer would return the remaining time after calling
> > NtCancelTimer, but my experiments show that some weird value gets
> > returned. See my attached testcase. Build with -lntdll.
>
> Thanks, that was the piece I was missing last night.
Just ignore the bug in the while expression, please...
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat