linux-kernel - nanosleep() uses CLOCK_MONOTONIC, should be CLOCK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:35:41 +0200
From:	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: nanosleep() uses CLOCK_MONOTONIC, should be CLOCK_REALTIME?

Thomas,

(I gues you are the right target for this?)

The POSIX.1 specification of nanosleep() says:

        But, except for the case of being interrupted by a signal, the
        suspension time shall not be less than the time  specified  by
        rqtp, as measured by the system clock CLOCK_REALTIME.


However, reading kernel/hrtimer.c:sys_nanosleep(), it appears that
CLOCK_MONOTONIC is used.

     return hrtimer_nanosleep(&tu, rmtp, HRTIMER_MODE_REL, CLOCK_MONOTONIC);

Is there a reason to use CLOCK_MONOTONIC, instead of CLOCK_REALTIME?  Is it
intentional?  If yes, then I should document this in the man-pages.  If not,
then it should be fixed.

Cheers,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
man-pages onlne: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html
Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/