Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 13:41:29 +0200 From: Davide Italiano <davide@freebsd.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r255437 - in head: cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libzpool/common cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libzpool/common/sys sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/... Message-ID: <CACYV=-FYXB0khXVNZVs8w-WQ0=JRwKYmWAK8h9Q9R-CTEmqDgg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <523FEA6B.6020402@FreeBSD.org> References: <201309100146.r8A1kmri091170@svn.freebsd.org> <CACYV=-EfAH583bY1rkXkskefvRS_4n9VBtG6KLw0mdJvpiWSTQ@mail.gmail.com> <523FEA6B.6020402@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote: > on 10/09/2013 15:03 Davide Italiano said the following: >> The Illumos cv_timedwait_hires() doesn't use 'res' argument so if you >> want to be consistent with their behaviour you should pass '0' as >> precision argument to cv_timedwait_sbt(). > > As far as I can see, illumos does use the resolution. > > -- > Andriy Gapon Hmm, it looks like I was looking at the wrong version of cv_timedwait_sbt() (the one in lib/libzpool/common/kernel.c), thanks for noticing. That said, I'm not still sure there's an 1:1 mapping between our precision concept and their (but I might be wrong here), and I think gethrestime is not suitable for the amount of precision required. -- Davide "There are no solved problems; there are only problems that are more or less solved" -- Henri Poincare
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACYV=-FYXB0khXVNZVs8w-WQ0=JRwKYmWAK8h9Q9R-CTEmqDgg>