From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Feb 27 09:53:39 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8961416A4CF
	for <emulation@freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:53:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.pair.com (relay.pair.com [209.68.1.20])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 066F643D39
	for <emulation@freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:53:39 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from silby@silby.com)
Received: (qmail 92317 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2004 17:53:37 -0000
Received: from niwun.pair.com (HELO localhost) (209.68.2.70)
  by relay.pair.com with SMTP; 27 Feb 2004 17:53:37 -0000
X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:53:36 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: Mike Johnson <ahze@ahze.net>
Message-ID: <20040227114628.N724@odysseus.silby.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: emulation@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: emulators/rtc with other apps other than Linux apps?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems
	<freebsd-emulation.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation>,
	<mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-emulation>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-emulation>,
	<mailto:freebsd-emulation-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:53:39 -0000


Hi Mike!  (Hm, that sounds odd...)

The rtc port could work fine with native FreeBSD programs, I have been
running most of my tests with natively compiled test tools.

If your kern.hz is high enough, then the rtc driver should provide the
best accuracy possible.  If the application uses rtc properly, then I
believe that yes, it will perform better than using usleep.  However, I
have not had a chance to look at the mplayer source code to see if this is
the case.

Also, we do not implement the full set of features that linux's rtc driver
has yet, so if mplayer is depending on those features it may not be
working correctly.

Finally, the rtc driver should work fine on 5.2 - that's the platform I'm
developing it on!  However, note that some driver changes happened in the
last week, and that I have not updated the port to compensate yet, so if
you're running a really recent -current that there may be some breakage.

I'll give mplayer a shot when and if I get some time.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack