From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Jan 23 19:32:25 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 712AC14C13; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 19:32:23 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: (from eischen@localhost)
	by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) id WAA28924;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:32:15 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:32:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
Message-Id: <200001240332.WAA28924@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
To: dnelson@emsphone.com, mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net
Subject: Re: kern/13644
Cc: bde@FreeBSD.ORG, davids@webmaster.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG,
	jasone@canonware.com
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> I understand.  And this will also  happen in case of  a simple printf().
> What I see, however, with select()  is that it _consistently_ takes 9-10
> msecs longer  then specified  to return. On  an idle  machine... Someone
> mentioned, that the  number of ticks is, actually,  rounded up. Perhaps,
> it should be rounded down?

You can't round down and still obey POSIX semantics.  "at least" will
not be satisfied.  You have to guarantee that the actual time is greater
than or equal to the amount of time specified.

Dan Eischen
eischen@vigrid.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message