Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 23:50:25 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Davide Italiano <davide@FreeBSD.org>, Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: API explosion (Re: [RFC/RFT] calloutng) Message-ID: <20121222225025.GA46583@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <15947.1355914806@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <50CF88B9.6040004@FreeBSD.org> <20121218173643.GA94266@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <50D0B00D.8090002@FreeBSD.org> <50D0E42B.6030605@FreeBSD.org> <20121218225823.GA96962@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <1355873265.1198.183.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <14604.1355910848@critter.freebsd.dk> <CACYV=-Eg542iHm9KfujPvCzZrA4TqepEBVA8RzT1YOHnCgfJnA@mail.gmail.com> <50D192E8.3020704@FreeBSD.org> <15947.1355914806@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:00:06AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> --------
> In message <50D192E8.3020704@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Motin writes:
> >Linux uses 32.32 format in their eventtimers code.
> (And that is no accident, I know who they got the number from :-)
> >But if at some point we want to be able to
> >handle absolute wall time, [...]
> Then you have other problems, including but not limited to clock
> being stepped, leap-seconds, suspend/resume and frequency stability.
> If you want to support callouts of the type ("At 14:00 UTC tomorrow")
> (disregarding the time-zone issue), you need to catch all significant
> changes to our UTC estimate and recalibrate your callout based on
> that.
> It is not obvious that we have applications for such an API that
> warrant the complexity.
> Either way, such a facility should be layered on top of the callout
> facility, which should always run in "elapsed time"[1] with no attention
> paid to what NTPD might do to the UTC estimate.
POSIX specifies functions that assume such a facility exists, although
applications may not care much if we implement them incorrectly.
For example, pthread_mutex_timedlock() and sem_timedwait() shall time
out when the CLOCK_REALTIME clock reaches the given value, and
pthread_cond_timedwait() and clock_nanosleep() (with TIMER_ABSTIME)
shall time out when the specified clock reaches the given value.
> So summary: 32.32 is the right format.
> Poul-Henning
> [1] Notice that "elapsed time" needs a firm definition with respect
> to suspend/resume, and that this decision has big implications
> for the API use and code duplication.
> I think it prudent to specify a flag to callouts, to tell what
> should happen on suspend/resume, something like:
> SR_CANCEL /* Cancel the callout on S/R */
> /* no flag* /* Toll this callout only when system is running */
> SR_IGNORE /* Toll suspended time from callout */
> If you get this right, callouts from device drivers will just "DTRT",
> if you get it wrong, all device drivers will need boilerplate code
> to handle S/R
Userland could get access to this via CLOCK_REALTIME vs CLOCK_MONOTONIC
vs CLOCK_UPTIME.
--
Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121222225025.GA46583>