On 2/23/2019 4:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 23 20:48, Ken Brown wrote: >> On 2/23/2019 2:15 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> Below's the NSSTC I used to test my timerfd implementation (based on >>> another STC to show a problem in POSIX timers). From what I can tell it >>> works as desired. If you find a problem, please point it out or send a >>> patch. >> >> Thanks, that saved me a lot of time. I was in the process of creating a test >> case when your mail arrived. >> >> Your test works fine. For example: >> >> $ gcc timerfd_test.c -o timerfd_test >> >> $ ./timerfd_test.exe 3 1 10 >> 0.000: timer started 52379 >> 2.988: 52379 read: 1; total=1 >> 3.988: 52379 read: 1; total=2 >> 4.989: 52379 read: 1; total=3 >> 5.987: 52379 read: 1; total=4 >> 7.001: 52379 read: 1; total=5 >> 7.987: 52379 read: 1; total=6 >> 9.001: 52379 read: 1; total=7 >> 9.987: 52379 read: 1; total=8 >> 10.987: 52379 read: 1; total=9 >> 11.997: 52379 read: 1; total=10 >> >> But if I change CLOCK_MONOTONIC by CLOCK_REALTIME in the call to >> timerfd_create, >> then I get the following: > > Only in timerfd_create? Not in clock_gettime? If you don't > do that, you're using a different clock with entirely different > values for the starttime. > > Actually, this testcase started with CLOCK_REALTIME in both calls. > If I revert to that, I get: > > )$ ./timerfd 3 1 10 > 0.000: timer started 644 > 3.001: 644 read: 1; total=1 > 4.001: 644 read: 1; total=2 > 5.017: 644 read: 1; total=3 > 6.001: 644 read: 1; total=4 > 7.001: 644 read: 1; total=5 > 8.009: 644 read: 1; total=6 > 9.002: 644 read: 1; total=7 > 10.001: 644 read: 1; total=8 > 11.010: 644 read: 1; total=9 > 12.017: 644 read: 1; total=10 > > I tested this STC with differnt clocks, but it's important to > use the same cloack for clock_gettime and timerfd_create.
Yes, that was careless of me. I now get the same results as you. I'll have to go back to the emacs sources and see what else might be different there. Ken
