Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 1/2] timer impl
On 12/14/2010 07:34 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
In addition to Hu's comments, and the fact that you are probably going
to revise the exposed interface anyways, here's some additional points.
* src/util/timer.c src/util/timer.h src/util/timer_linux.c
src/util/timer_win32.c:
timer implementation
* src/Makefile.am: build timer
* src/libvirt_private.syms: Export public functions
* src/libvirt.c: Initialize timer
* configure.ac: check the functions in librt used by timer
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency(a)cn.fujitsu.com>
-EXTRA_DIST += util/threads-pthread.c util/threads-win32.c
+EXTRA_DIST += util/threads-pthread.c util/threads-win32.c \
+ util/timer_linux.c
timer-win32.c? Also, I'd go with timer-linux.c, not timer_linux.c.
+# timer.h
+get_clock;
Bad idea to pollute the namespace with get_clock; better would be
something like virGetClock.
+virNewTimer;
+virFreeTimer;
+virModTimer;
+virDelTimer;
# usb.h
+
+static virTimerPtr timer_list = NULL;
+static void realarm_timer(void);
+static void __realarm_timer(uint64_t);
It is dangerous to declare functions in the __ namespace, since that is
reserved for libc and friends.
+uint64_t get_clock(void)
+{
+ struct timespec ts;
+
+ clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &ts);
+ return ts.tv_sec * 1000000000ULL + ts.tv_nsec;
You probably ought to check for overflow here. Dealing with raw
nanoseconds is rather fine-grained; is it any better to go with micro or
even milliseconds, or does libvirt really require something as precise
as nanosecond timeouts?
--
Eric Blake eblake(a)redhat.com +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachments:
- signature.asc (application/pgp-signature — 619 bytes)