This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Patch to have clock_gettime(CLOCK_CPUTIME_ID) return ENOENT ifHP timing is unreliable


Well, it would have been nice to get responses on the subject matter
rather than a threat. I was certainly only trying to help.

I still have no answer as to why it is acceptable for
clock_gettime(CLOCK_CPUTIME_ID) to return unreliable data.

Is it that applications should not rely on
clock_gettime(CLOCK_CPUTIME_ID) if clock_getclockcpuid() returns
ENOENT? If so is that documented somewhere?

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Ulrich Drepper wrote:

> Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> > Would that be acceptable?
>
> No.  I've explained this before and just keeping on sending such mails
> will have only one result, namely, that you'll be ignored regardless of
> what you say.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]