Re: 2.6-test6: nanosleep+SIGCONT weirdness

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> 
> Of course it's supported.  the clock_* functions are in librt.  And they
> are supported and, when working, greatly increase the usability.  The
> old user-level implementation is as good as we get it but really not up
> to the job.

Okey-dokey - I verified that the clock_nanosleep() function is also 
broken.

I'll see if I can see what the mess is all about. That posix-timer "retry" 
code really is a pretty horrible thing.

		Linus


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