Re: Adding clock_gettime1() to be shared with emulations ?

[Nicolas Joly <njoly%pasteur.fr@localhost>]

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 07:16:10AM +1000, matthew green wrote:
> 
>    On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:52:07AM +0200, Nicolas Joly wrote:
>    [...]
>    > The attached patch introduce a new function clock_getres1() function
>    > which has most of the corresponding syscall logic except for the
>    > copyout call.
>    > 
>    > This has the benefit to have all emulations can use it and are now
>    > automatically synced with the native version (as a side effect, they
>    > all gain CLOCK_MONOTONIC support i was looking for).
>    > 
>    > I'd like to commit it in a few days, unless someone objects ... And
>    > then do mostly the same for clock_gettime().
>    
>    I was about to do the same for clock_gettime syscall, when i
>    discovered the SoC project `Light weight precision user level time
>    reading' which talks about optimising clock_gettime(2) :
>    
>      http://www.netbsd.org/contrib/soc-projects.html#fast-time
>    
>    While adding a clock_gettime1() function ensure that all the
>    corresponding syscalls will be kept in sync; adding a function call
>    here does not look like a good step towards optimisation.
> 
> IMO, these are orthogonal problems and you should make the
> change to clock_gettime() you proposed.
> 
> we don't care about making emulated system calls faster more
> than we care about them actually working...

Done. Thanks.

-- 
Nicolas Joly

Biological Software and Databanks.
Institut Pasteur, Paris.