From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33411) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFmFS-0000L7-LM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:57:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFmFL-0004fv-9i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:57:09 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5299) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SFmFL-0004fV-1P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:57:03 -0400 Message-ID: <4F7D9691.9090507@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:56:49 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6e10c02cbb87fe30703de848455593df41ec7f4b.1333623555.git.jan.kiszka@siemens.com> <4F7D887B.1030104@siemens.com> <4F7D921E.9040003@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: malc Cc: Kevin Wolf , Jan Kiszka , Anthony Liguori , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Peter Maydell Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: >>>>> Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere >>>>> in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some BSD breakage. >>>>> >>> It's probably worth mentioning that using anything other than >>> clock_gettime and CLOCK_MONOTONING (as well as setting proper pthread >>> clock attr on the condition variable) is prone to the surprises (such >>> as NTP corrections and daylight saving changes). >> >> I was about to suggest the same, but how widespread is support for >> pthread_condattr_setclock? > > If it's not all is lost anyway. Only once every year. :) Paolo