From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Nov 18 7:48:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from gratis.grondar.za (grouter.grondar.za [196.7.18.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B39837B479; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 07:48:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from grondar.za (grapevine.grondar.za [196.7.18.17]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eAIFmOJ12563; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:48:24 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <200011181548.eAIFmOJ12563@gratis.grondar.za> To: Daniel Eischen Cc: Mike Smith , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "Monotonic" counter/register call - commit candidate. References: In-Reply-To: ; from Daniel Eischen "Sat, 18 Nov 2000 10:25:22 EST." Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:48:21 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG If this thread is going to go in this direction, then please change the subject. I still haven't got resolution on _my_ thread. M > On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Mike Smith wrote: > > > On a somewhat related note, I could use something to measure time > > > that wasn't a system call in the threads library. Is there a way > > > we can get a timer or something that was mmap'able? > > > > You could probably arrange for some portion of the timecounter space to > > be mapped read-only into userspace. How precise does it need to be? > > Scheduling tick resolution or better. I would like to use it for > waking up threads that are in states that timeout. The smallest > resolution would be for something like pthread_cond_timedwait() > which is timespec (nanosecs), but we don't need to be that resolute. > Right now we use gettimeofday(). -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message