On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 4:44 AM Martin Pieuchot <m...@openbsd.org> wrote:
> The consensus is now to switch syscall doing sleeps to use tsleep_nsec(9). > Our direct goal is to stop expressing time as ticks, more might come > later. > The API futex(2) has a bug: it doesn't take a clockid_t and doesn't have a way to take an absolute timeout, which means userspace has to do non-ideal conversions to work around those limitations. While it might(?) make sense to keep futex(2) the way it is to support ports that use that exact API**, it feels like we should support a richer API to make libc/libpthread happier...and perhaps not have the insane argument unuse/reuse/overloading that futex(2) has (e.g., "pass uint32_t val2 as the fourth argument instead of timeout"). Let's say a diff magically appeared splitting out three syscalls for the three ops, with correct types and args and where timeouts were specified with timespec+clockid_t+"is absolute" flag, can that be slotted into all this without wailing and gnashing of teeth? ** I have no idea if any ports actually do that Philip Guenther
