< Previous by Date Date Index Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread Thread Index Next in Thread >

Re: [reSIProcate] Timers: why system time?


I can see how we would miss a roll-over with low timer activity, but I am not sure what you mean by "lose timers". If we have lost a timer from a timer heap, that implies the heap is now broken, because that is the only way to "lose" anything. So this is either much more serious, or much less serious than you have stated.

Best regards,
Byron Campen

Scott (and any other Windows developers on the list):

The Windows 49.7-day rollover fix in this patch uses heuristics to handle the rollover in an efficient manner -- you can actually lose timers if you have relatively low timer activity and a multi-minute timer running when the tick count rolls over. The chances of this happening are, admittedly, vanishingly small (especially in normal SIP usage). In any case, you might want to give that code a quick review to ensure that you're comfortable with it.

Also, I think it's safe to say that it's difficult to test the correctness of the code, as step one of any such test plan necessarily involves something like: "boot a Windows machine and wait 49.6 days." Make sure you're comfortable with that fact as well.

/a

Alexander wrote:
Hi

Here is a patch to use monotonic clock.
It is 3 modified files from reSIProcate 1.4.
Attached files have Windows (CLRF) eof-style.

Windows
=======

GetTickCount() with 16 ms inaccuracy used.
It is very simple to change it to timeGetTime() etc with 1 ms accuracy,
but it will require init/fini calls on application level and linking
with Winmm.lib
Tested on Windows XP SP2, compiled with VS7.1

Not tested on Windows CE

Linux
=====

If monotonic clock is not available (compile time and runtime) it will
fall back to gettimeofday()
I am not familiar with reSIProcate build system so I use workaround to
avoid linking with librt:
syscall( __NR_clock_gettime, ... )
instead of clock_gettime(...)

IMHO it may not work on other POSIX compliant platforms.

Pass only some basic tests on my Linux PC (2.6.18 kernel)

Any feedbacks appreciated.

Regards
Alexander Altshuler
Xeepe team
http://xeepe.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel

_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature