Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification

Joe Korty
2005-05-19T13:39:44Z

On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:15:54PM -0700, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez wrote:

> The main reason why we are asking for this is that timeouts in POSIX
> calls are always specified in an absolute form. Because most system
> calls take it in a relative form, glibc has to call the kernel twice

Also, it is quite evil for a library to internally convert a user-specified
end time into relative time .. this causes end-time drift.

Joe