Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:14:27 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Using the monotonic clock in time(1)?
Message-ID:  <CANCZdfpLkoLQi5epaUnEP2=PVEwS-EEV_B=%2B6i3oo9-WYT6tvQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2jjeVRxuKPdM4hhrbz8NG%2B_kx_Q2jS-QZs52BbB%2BYOt=Q@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAOtMX2jjeVRxuKPdM4hhrbz8NG%2B_kx_Q2jS-QZs52BbB%2BYOt=Q@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote:

> time(1) currently uses the realtime clock, which is undesirable for timing
> short-lived commands while ntpd is active.  I opened a review to add an
> option to use the monotonic clock instead, but jilles suggested that time
> should use the monotonic clock unconditionally, since that's almost always
> better for measuring short durations.  However, the Open Group's
> specification seems to require the real time clock.  What do the standards
> folks think?  Is the Open Group spec sufficiently ambiguous and/or wrong
> that we should switch to the monotonic clock instead?
>
> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14032
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/time.html


The issue with ntpd should only be the initial step. After that it steers
the frequency of the base clock which affects all clocks. It should be a
rare issue that the two clocks give different results.

Having said that I see no issue with using a monotonic clock here. I think
there's enough wiggle room in the standard to support it. It's really the
only clock you can t2-t1 with and get a guaranteed to be meaningful answer.
I can't imagine the OpenGroup specifies what happens over a time step the
real time clock for programs timed with time. The (real) is in parens,
which is not a normative form for specifying the time. I'm not a
professional standards lawyer, but my amateur reading says this is a good
change.

Warner



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfpLkoLQi5epaUnEP2=PVEwS-EEV_B=%2B6i3oo9-WYT6tvQ>