Florian Weimer writes:
* Sam Varshavchik:
> Based on a casual browsing of clock_gettime(3), CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
> seems to be a better fit for std::chrono::steady_clock's requirements
> as given in 20.11.7.2, with recent Linux kernels,
Are the Linux clock semantics documented somewhere in det
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Paolo Carlini
wrote:
\>> @@ -70,7 +70,11 @@
>> {
>> timespec tp;
>> // -EINVAL, -EFAULT
>> +#ifdef CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
>> + clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW, &tp);
>> +#else
>> clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &tp);
>> +#endif
>> re
* Sam Varshavchik:
> Based on a casual browsing of clock_gettime(3), CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
> seems to be a better fit for std::chrono::steady_clock's requirements
> as given in 20.11.7.2, with recent Linux kernels,
Are the Linux clock semantics documented somewhere in detail?
> +#ifdef CLOCK_MONO
On 10/21/2012 04:00 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Based on a casual browsing of clock_gettime(3), CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
seems to be a better fit for std::chrono::steady_clock's requirements
as given in 20.11.7.2, with recent Linux kernels,
Something like this:
Please always CC library patches to l
Based on a casual browsing of clock_gettime(3), CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW seems to
be a better fit for std::chrono::steady_clock's requirements as given in
20.11.7.2, with recent Linux kernels,
Something like this:
Index: libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/chrono.cc
===