nanosleep() patch

Corinna Vinschen
Tue Jan 21 16:17:00 GMT 2003

On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 11:02:01AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 04:58:42PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >I'm wondering if we could do without an extra function sleep_worker()
> >and let nanosleep() be the basic implementation.  So sleep() as well
> >as usleep() could call nanosleep().  Isn't that done that way in the
> >Linux kernel, too?
> In that case, nanosleep needs to be rewritten to deal with the same
> issues as sleep().

Sure.  nanosleep would be sleep_worker with timespec arguments.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                      
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list