From 2603401fa1f899a8ff60ec6a134d5bd511073a9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 23:25:26 +0200 Subject: IRC. --- open_issues/usleep.mdwn | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) create mode 100644 open_issues/usleep.mdwn (limited to 'open_issues/usleep.mdwn') diff --git a/open_issues/usleep.mdwn b/open_issues/usleep.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..b71cd902 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/usleep.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] + +[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable +id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this +document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or +any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant +Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license +is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + +[[!tag open_issue_glibc]] + +# IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2012-07-14 + + eeek, usleep has the issues which i fixed in nanosleep + pinotree: ? + * pinotree ponders a `mv sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/usleep.c + sysdeps/mach/usleep.c` + s/mv/cp/ + What the heck is the point of usleep(0) anyway? Isn't that + basically saying suspend for 0 milliseconds? + it's rounded up by the kernel I guess + i.e. suspend for the shortest time possible (a clock tick) + posix 2001 says that «If the value of useconds is 0, then the + call has no effect.» -- cgit v1.2.3