lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: POSIX.1b timers comments


Robert de Vries
rhdv@rhdv.cistron.nl

On 26 Jul 1999, Ulrich Drepper wrote:

> I appreciate seeing finally kernel support for this but have a few
> problems with the actual implementation:
>
> - CLONE_ITIMERS
>
> The meaning of the flag should be reverted. Since sharing itimers
> among all threads in a process is the POSIX behaviour this bit must
> be set. But it is not in existing implementation for obvious reasons.
>
> This is a general problem with extensions to the clone interface.

I agree, for every POSIX extension to come a CLONE flag is required, so
apart from the CLONE_SIGNALS flag, there is coming an CLONE_SEM,
CLONE_SHM and CLONE_MQ.

>
>
> - MAX_ITIMERS
>
> This should be TIMER_MAX. POSIX does not define MAX_ITIMERS.

I agree, the internal kernel definition should match the POSIX definition.

>
>
> - There is no DELAYTIMER_MAX definition.
>
> This might be missing since the implementation is not yet finished
> but in case this is not the reason please add it.

OK, it should be equal to INT_MAX.

BTW it looks like the kernel is lacking a sysconf system call. Or would
everybody prefer it to be in the C library?
One of the reasons for being in the kernel would be that certain kernel
compile time constants are only known in the kernel and not in the
C-library. For instance the number of TIMERS could be changed in the
kernel, while the C-library is unaware.

Robert

--
Robert de Vries
rhdv@rhdv.cistron.nl


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.046 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site