Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 12:43:16 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: dufault@hda.com, julian@whistle.com Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au, jlemon@americantv.com Subject: Re: HEADS UP Message-ID: <199908310243.MAA06997@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> How about struct timeval instead? Timevals shouldn't be used in new interfaces. Use timespecs, which are both Standard and more future proof. >Firstly we are talking about time deltas, and on the sysctl side of things >it's very hard to set 'timevals (as you'd need to set two different >variables) so you need a single value on teh userland side of things. sysctl can handle structs. The problems are that sysctl(8) has little or no support for inputting structs, and timespec units might be inconvenient (sysctl -w kern.quantum=0.001000000 vs sysctl -w kern.quantum=10000). We already use microseconds instead of nanoseconds for kern.quantum because nanoseconds resolution is unwieldy and not needed. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908310243.MAA06997>