Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:14:35 -0500
From:      Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        Thomas Mueller <tmueller@sysgo.com>, delphij@delphij.net
Subject:   Re: Xorg vs gettimeofday() and clock_gettime()
Message-ID:  <200802281714.43057.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <18375.10353.816420.456552@gromit.timing.com>
References:  <47C320DB.70004@delphij.net> <200802281607.30178.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <18375.10353.816420.456552@gromit.timing.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 28 February 2008 04:32 pm, John E Hein wrote:
> Jung-uk Kim wrote at 16:07 -0500 on Feb 28, 2008:
>  > So this test was introduced in the following commit:
>  >
>  > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg-commit/2006-November/
>  >009390.html
>  >
>  > Google found me this:
>  >
>  > http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag-review/msg00489.
>  >html
>  >
>  > 'The recently-approved 1003.1j-2000 adds CLOCK_MONOTONIC to the
>  > list.'
>  >
>  > I think 1003.1b-1993 added clock_gettime(2) and configure.ac
>  > tests bogus spec.
>
> I suspect the autoconf test was probably written against the linux
> time.h which specifies _POSIX_C_SOURCE 199309 for all the CLOCK_*
> constants.
>
> Your quote seems to indicate that is wrong (which makes sense to me
> since I don't recall the CLOCK_* values around back to 1993).  But
> I have not done the work to dig into the spec.
>
> If someone verifies that to be the case, please submit a PR to xorg
> to fix their autoconf check.

I found it from SUSv3:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/time.h.html

'The manifest constant CLOCK_MONOTONIC and the clock_nanosleep() 
function are added for alignment with IEEE Std 1003.1j-2000.'

Jung-uk Kim



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200802281714.43057.jkim>