On 10/06/2015 12:04 PM, Matt Turner wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Jan Vesely <jano.ves...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Jan Vesely <jano.ves...@gmail.com> >> --- >> include/c11/threads_posix.h | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/c11/threads_posix.h b/include/c11/threads_posix.h >> index 3def6c4..ce9853b 100644 >> --- a/include/c11/threads_posix.h >> +++ b/include/c11/threads_posix.h >> @@ -136,8 +136,14 @@ cnd_timedwait(cnd_t *cond, mtx_t *mtx, const xtime *xt) > > I'm confused. The docs here [1] give a different prototype for this > function -- one without the xt argument. Is our implementation for > some pre-C11 spec?
It's not without the xt argument... it's with that argument having a different (const struct timespec* restrict time_point) type. It looks like mtx_timedlock (http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/thread/mtx_timedlock) has the same issue. As far as I can tell, C11 struct timespec (http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/chrono/timespec) is the same as Linux struct timespec. POSIX (http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/time.h.html) allows it to have extra fields, but I don't think that should be a problem. Maybe there's a conflict on Windows? Maybe Jose knows? > [1] http://en.cppreference.com/w/c/thread/cnd_timedwait > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
