This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-patches@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: nanosleep() patch
Corinna,
Chris,
Thanks for your feedback.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 05:17:06PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 11:02:01AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 04:58:42PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > >I'm wondering if we could do without an extra function
> > >sleep_worker() and let nanosleep() be the basic implementation. So
> > >sleep() as well as usleep() could call nanosleep(). Isn't that
> > >done that way in the Linux kernel, too?
> >
> > In that case, nanosleep needs to be rewritten to deal with the same
> > issues as sleep().
>
> Sure. nanosleep would be sleep_worker with timespec arguments.
OK, I will rework the patch as specified above.
Regarding usleep(), I was afraid to change it to use nanosleep() (aka
sleep_worker()) because its implementation was different than sleep().
Additionally, its current behavior does not seem to agree with what is
documented in "man 3 usleep" under Red Hat Linux 8.0. Should I include
a reworked usleep() in the next version of this patch?
Thanks,
Jason
--
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers
Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6