Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2)

2011-08-03 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 3 01:20, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 17:42 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Does that mean the return value from NtQueryTimer is unreliable? > > In what way is it wrong? > > I'm not sure. When I run an STC (attached), it works as expected. In > cancelable_wait(),

Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2)

2011-08-03 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 09:45 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Aug 3 01:20, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 17:42 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > Does that mean the return value from NtQueryTimer is unreliable? > > > In what way is it wrong? > > > > I'm not sure. When

Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2)

2011-08-03 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 3 04:19, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 09:45 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Aug 3 01:20, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 17:42 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > > Does that mean the return value from NtQueryTimer is unreliable? > > > > In w

Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2)

2011-08-03 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 11:27 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Aug 3 04:19, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > > Never mind, I figured it out. The difference is the timeout to > > WaitFor*Object*(); my STC doesn't allow the timer to finish, but > > cancelable_wait() does with the INFINITE timeout. If t

Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2)

2011-08-03 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 3 04:35, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 11:27 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Aug 3 04:19, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > > > Never mind, I figured it out. The difference is the timeout to > > > WaitFor*Object*(); my STC doesn't allow the timer to finish, but > > > can

[PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2), round two

2011-08-03 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
Here's my second attempt at clock_nanosleep(2). After what we dealt with in round one, this should be a piece of cake. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/clock_nanosleep.html http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online/pages/man2/clock_nanosleep.2.html Patches for winsup/cy

Re: [PATCH] clock_nanosleep(2), round two

2011-08-03 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Aug 3 13:42, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > * cygwin.din (clock_nanosleep): Export. > * posix.sgml (std-notimpl): Move clock_nanosleep from here... > (std-susv4): ... to here. > (std-notes): Note limitations of clock_nanosleep. > * signal.cc (clock_nanosleep): Renamed

[PATCH] Add /proc/devices

2011-08-03 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
This patchset implements /proc/devices[1]: $ cat /proc/devices Character devices: 1 mem 5 /dev/tty 5 /dev/console 5 /dev/ptmx 9 st 13 misc 14 sound 117 ttyS 136 tty Block devices: 2 fd 8 sd 11 sr 65 sd 66 sd 67 sd 68 sd 69 sd 70 sd 71 sd The question is how to handle /dev