A NOTE has been added to this issue. ====================================================================== http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1216 ====================================================================== Reported By: mikecrowe Assigned To: ajosey ====================================================================== Project: 1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 Issue ID: 1216 Category: System Interfaces Type: Enhancement Request Severity: Comment Priority: normal Status: Under Review Name: Mike Crowe Organization: User Reference: Section: pthread Page Number: 0 Line Number: 0 Interp Status: --- Final Accepted Text: ====================================================================== Date Submitted: 2018-11-26 18:53 UTC Last Modified: 2019-05-09 18:03 UTC ====================================================================== Summary: Adding clockid parameter to functions that accept absolute struct timespec timeouts ====================================================================== Relationships ID Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------------- related to 0001164 Correct C++11 std::condition_variable r... ======================================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------- (0004391) enh (reporter) - 2019-05-09 18:03 http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1216#c4391 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- tomcherry from Android's C/C++ team has implemented this for Android too (https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/bionic/+/958058) and we're happy to submit that as soon this gets accepted into POSIX. He had two quick comments about the wording (but can't log in for some reason): The first is on the phrasing of 'A "safety timeout" of a minute on a call pthread_mutex_timedlock() could actually mean no timeout at all if the system clock is warped forwards immediately prior to the call.' I'm used to the term 'no timeout' meaning that the call will block indefinitely, but in this case, pthread_mutex_timedlock() will immediately return, right? Would it be more clear if 'could actually mean no timeout at all' were replaced with 'would return immediately regardless of if the lock was acquired' ? The second is that it may be worth commenting on the other situation, where time is warped backwards immediately prior to the call and the time out happens much later than originally expected. It's actually that issue that has caused more issues for Android than the former. Issue History Date Modified Username Field Change ====================================================================== 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe New Issue 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Status New => Under Review 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Assigned To => ajosey 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Name => Mike Crowe 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Section => pthread 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Page Number => 0 2018-11-26 18:53 mikecrowe Line Number => 0 2018-11-27 09:23 geoffclare Project 1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 => 1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 2018-11-27 09:23 geoffclare Relationship added related to 0001164 2018-11-27 16:02 nick Note Added: 0004171 2019-01-07 21:26 mikecrowe Note Added: 0004196 2019-01-19 04:08 mikecrowe Note Added: 0004215 2019-03-06 13:17 mikecrowe Note Added: 0004276 2019-05-07 12:09 mikecrowe Note Added: 0004387 2019-05-09 18:03 enh Note Added: 0004391 ======================================================================
