[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-10-04 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. Checked on my real machine using 4.6 kernel with your patch. This specific test passes now. Bug #2951: clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec http://bugs.dragonflybsd.org/issues/2951#change-12998 * Author: zhtw

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-25 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by swildner. I've pushed a fix to master fixing these issues on real kernels. See https://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/dragonfly.git/commitdiff/c1b9c0932e482bb6a37eb190a5b504b270d2166d Why it doesn't work for the vkernel, I haven't had much time investigating. Can you

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. Thanks! It should definitely solve the problem with the nsec overflow. But turned out I was very lucky with this test, because can't reproduce the overflow anymore. But I still have this chezscheme test that fails. In any case, I will be able to confirm

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by swildner. Sorry, there was one more typo in the overflow fix, fixed in https://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~swildner/process_cputime4.diff Bug #2951: clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by swildner. Yes, get_curthread_cputime() was wrongly adding so that tv_nsec could become >= 10. Please check https://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~swildner/process_cputime3.diff on a real kernel. I've not yet looked at the vkernel issues. This patch adds a fix

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. When I said million, I of course meant billion. But the example is correct anyway. I am also looking at the code, but my experience with kernel programming is nearly non-existing. Bug #2951: clock_gettime always

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. This is interesting. When you asked me to doublecheck if clock_gettime works with CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID (because you said it works for you), I actually tested it on real kernel. So it does work on real kernel. But now I'm proceeding with testing

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. Thank you. Just tried it. The result is still 0. But again, I'm testing in under a vkernel. Did you test it on a real kernel? Is there anything I could do wrong here? Bug #2951: clock_gettime always repots 0 sec,

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-21 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. I was able to run 4.4 vkernel with your patch (but with ru replaced with p_ru). Unfortunately it did not help, I still see 0 nsec both in case of CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID and CLOCK_PROF. (Still can't run 4.6 vkernel.)

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-18 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by swildner. CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID isn't broken here, as far as I can see. Are you sure it returns 0 for you? CLOCK_PROF and CLOCK_VIRTUAL always return 0 here. Not sure what's the cause. Please check this patch for CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID ->

[DragonFlyBSD - Bug #2951] clock_gettime always repots 0 sec, 0 nsec

2016-09-16 Thread bugtracker-admin
Issue #2951 has been updated by zhtw. I just noticed that in the header sys/time.h there is a whole lot of CLOCK_* constants. Some of them are FreeBSD-specific, some Linux-specific. So technically, but since (at least) CLOCK_PROF is mentioned in the man page, it should work. Btw, I checked