X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:message-id
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=oymdrIeZhyfok8XLCJljeEzEnpuQ3GKAKU7rrF3Sh/73Mz3PdLDDR
	fUDd3F3zLM3AnVzicGnI+hUuN+neLyT0R4iAGoSwp6cCZeG6pGnA8jM8qqoqNlA3
	CDrppG/G2oBUrBstDECZna+vaXlqOWZP0HGX43aOXTJ+eIVFgZxyJw=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:message-id
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=/l78hqLfXpOyzscVbUrgmTWl/4c=; b=be4w0U1Tmb7B0dIbw2Zd9mzzht38
	c+24ExHm4njpFLCXMPPofPQaxIvgzHXsvJOFKaOGU2uZWUDYW7WFuVkcuGD4dYj0
	5Wgihb0AlAUQV29ENybbYKgXJ7TMuYX6+m/zvrimGLh963PRO9MLt7N7UVk2JvLy
	pRR6OS6Tz6z/au4=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:939, H*F:D*yahoo.com, yahoocom, yahoo.com
X-HELO:	sonic303-23.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1551027453; bh=Bg7+yX/VyAm1aI12RVgC/p4xqjIQj0fD5AgSuzpEZ2Q=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=sXa4pehM9S/MOPopjIV1WahiXmIamidJOeAgVYlvjHynkOEIbXuIo961yreNwSnvcmLPVTn3ShEHAldj/efYvH1am3Ll6a4/3rmQpkURuNTGoBC4qvmYfRFg+gXRl5bE6BcEOd/LUAPbiorJ5OK9TYFyqycYXTsqrwtet4Cm8t11ySLQJNyrUPDWsJuxgf0lzrbM9gKHTK9NnwgJFkzQJXOGO8O5P52RsvxKKhwUgJ64F9bVMkyrdstsxIODQ3MppryPHAPfziT41G6yo/HU7WZecDjUPiIPv99ngV0uTyyaWN1hqXySuGYBKsiNBKEkXkxvvWS7r6bYf88GPZcrBA==
Date:	Sun, 24 Feb 2019 08:57:26 -0800
From:	"Mike Gran via cygwin" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	Mike Gran <spk121 AT yahoo DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: return value of getitimer after an alarm
Message-ID:	<20190224165726.GA8095@joshua.dnsalias.com>
References:	<20190224065837 DOT GA14582 AT joshua DOT dnsalias DOT com> <20190224091858 DOT GD4133 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20190224091858.GD4133@calimero.vinschen.de>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:18:58AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 23 22:58, Mike Gran via cygwin wrote:
> > Hi-
> > 
> > There is an unusual behaviour with setitimer/getitimer and I'm not
> > sure if it is a bug or not.
> > 
> > Basically, if I call setitimer to set an SIGALRM, and then call
> > getitimer *after* the alarm goes off, I rather expect the time I
> > receive from getitimer should be {tv_sec = 0, tv_usec = 0}, but, in
> > fact, it_value is the negative of the unix timestamp.
> > 
> > Attached is a test case.
> 
> Thanks for the testcase.  The reason for the problem is this:
> I optimized a condition in Cygwin's POSIX timers "gettime" method.
> I optimized it so effecively that it was practically invisible :}
> 
> I pushed a patch and uploaded new developer snapshots to
> https://cygwin.com/snapshots/
> 
> Please test.

Works for me.  Thanks for your help.

-Mike Gran


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -