On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 11:19 PM Jₑₙₛ Gustedt <jens.gustedt@inria.fr> wrote:

Hi,

on Wed, 3 May 2023 15:58:26 -0700 you (enh <enh@google.com>) wrote:

> (i share others' skepticism that timespec_get() is very useful,

I don't think that these interfaces by themselves are the most
interesting. The original motivation to create these interfaces stem
from the creation the integration of threads in to the C standard. And
there the monotonic and thread-specific clocks make all their sense.

But also having process cpu usage in a well-defined interface (`clock`
usage is not portable for that) is a win.

sure, but the more esoteric the clocks, the less likely _that_ part is to be portable anyway.

> and especially that non-ISO bases will ever be useful to anyway, but
> i like the idea of allowing future additions to "just work" with an
> old libc enough that i've implemented bionic's
> timespec_get()/timespec_getres() in this style.)

Great!

Do you have a link to that?

https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/bionic/+/2576754

The particular choices of values become
part of the ABI, sort-of. So it would be better to be consistent
between implementations.

are there any two linux libcs that are abi compatible? i didn't think so.