Svante Signell, le Tue 01 Jul 2014 12:41:47 +0200, a écrit : > On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 22:56 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Svante Signell, le Sun 29 Jun 2014 16:35:42 +0200, a écrit : > > > Looking at libsamplerate test problems, I found that clock(3) used > > > there is not reliable. Strange results are obtained on too Linux with a > > > simple test program. > > > > What do you mean by "strange"? The output I get > > > > $ ./test > > start = 3870 > > end = 3910 > > cpu_time_used = 0.000040 > > I get: > gcc -g -Wall test_clock.c > ./a.out > start = 0 > end = 0 > cpu_time_used = 0.000000
Well, yes, as I said sleep() doesn't consume CPU while sleeping, so clock() would only account the small overhead for starting the sleep, which is very small. Since the granularity is 1/100th second on the Hurd, that eventually amounts to zero. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140701120434.ga6...@type.ens-lyon.fr
