Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:47:06 +0100 From: Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> To: Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sem_timedwait3(..., ..., clockid_t) Message-ID: <CABh_MKkhBwerUpEKzgDs27_B5VNyvH9uhR-cOL4eF2rAof4foQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <e0bc00fc-36f4-a81b-62fc-367931b3929c@FreeBSD.org> References: <1d1cb3d6-a2d2-1a3e-5d20-51206524ffbe@FreeBSD.org> <e0bc00fc-36f4-a81b-62fc-367931b3929c@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Eric, 2017-02-15 22:57 GMT+01:00 Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@freebsd.org>: > int sem_timedwait3_np(sem_t *sem, const struct timespec *abs_timeout, > clockid_t clock_id); Could we please make the argument order a bit more consistent to clock_nanosleep() (i.e., putting the clockid_t in front of the timespec)? Should we also provide support for the TIMER_ABSTIME flag? -- Ed Schouten <ed@nuxi.nl> Nuxi, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands KvK-nr.: 62051717
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CABh_MKkhBwerUpEKzgDs27_B5VNyvH9uhR-cOL4eF2rAof4foQ>