Search Results

Search found 12 results on 1 pages for 'timespec'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Perl module for parsing natural language time duration specifications (similar to the "at" command)?

    - by Ryan Thompson
    I'm writing a perl script that takes a "duration" option, and I'd like to be able to specify this duration in a fairly flexible manner, as opposed to only taking a single unit (e.g. number of seconds). The UNIX at command implements this kind of behavior, by allowing specifications such as "now + 3 hours + 2 days". For my program, the "now" part is implied, so I just want to parse the stuff after the plus sign. (Note: the at command also parses exact date specifications, but I only want to parse durations.) Is there a perl module for parsing duration specifications like this? I don't need the exact syntax accepted by at, just any reasonable syntax for specifying time durations. Edit: Basically, I want something like DateTime::Format::Flexible for durations instead of dates.

    Read the article

  • Where is the virtual function call overhead?

    - by Semen Semenych
    Hello everybody, I'm trying to benchmark the difference between a function pointer call and a virtual function call. To do this, I have written two pieces of code, that do the same mathematical computation over an array. One variant uses an array of pointers to functions and calls those in a loop. The other variant uses an array of pointers to a base class and calls its virtual function, which is overloaded in the derived classes to do absolutely the same thing as the functions in the first variant. Then I print the time elapsed and use a simple shell script to run the benchmark many times and compute the average run time. Here is the code: #include <iostream> #include <cstdlib> #include <ctime> #include <cmath> using namespace std; long long timespecDiff(struct timespec *timeA_p, struct timespec *timeB_p) { return ((timeA_p->tv_sec * 1000000000) + timeA_p->tv_nsec) - ((timeB_p->tv_sec * 1000000000) + timeB_p->tv_nsec); } void function_not( double *d ) { *d = sin(*d); } void function_and( double *d ) { *d = cos(*d); } void function_or( double *d ) { *d = tan(*d); } void function_xor( double *d ) { *d = sqrt(*d); } void ( * const function_table[4] )( double* ) = { &function_not, &function_and, &function_or, &function_xor }; int main(void) { srand(time(0)); void ( * index_array[100000] )( double * ); double array[100000]; for ( long int i = 0; i < 100000; ++i ) { index_array[i] = function_table[ rand() % 4 ]; array[i] = ( double )( rand() / 1000 ); } struct timespec start, end; clock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &start); for ( long int i = 0; i < 100000; ++i ) { index_array[i]( &array[i] ); } clock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &end); unsigned long long time_elapsed = timespecDiff(&end, &start); cout << time_elapsed / 1000000000.0 << endl; } and here is the virtual function variant: #include <iostream> #include <cstdlib> #include <ctime> #include <cmath> using namespace std; long long timespecDiff(struct timespec *timeA_p, struct timespec *timeB_p) { return ((timeA_p->tv_sec * 1000000000) + timeA_p->tv_nsec) - ((timeB_p->tv_sec * 1000000000) + timeB_p->tv_nsec); } class A { public: virtual void calculate( double *i ) = 0; }; class A1 : public A { public: void calculate( double *i ) { *i = sin(*i); } }; class A2 : public A { public: void calculate( double *i ) { *i = cos(*i); } }; class A3 : public A { public: void calculate( double *i ) { *i = tan(*i); } }; class A4 : public A { public: void calculate( double *i ) { *i = sqrt(*i); } }; int main(void) { srand(time(0)); A *base[100000]; double array[100000]; for ( long int i = 0; i < 100000; ++i ) { array[i] = ( double )( rand() / 1000 ); switch ( rand() % 4 ) { case 0: base[i] = new A1(); break; case 1: base[i] = new A2(); break; case 2: base[i] = new A3(); break; case 3: base[i] = new A4(); break; } } struct timespec start, end; clock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &start); for ( int i = 0; i < 100000; ++i ) { base[i]->calculate( &array[i] ); } clock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &end); unsigned long long time_elapsed = timespecDiff(&end, &start); cout << time_elapsed / 1000000000.0 << endl; } My system is LInux, Fedora 13, gcc 4.4.2. The code is compiled it with g++ -O3. The first one is test1, the second is test2. Now I see this in console: [Ignat@localhost circuit_testing]$ ./test2 && ./test2 0.0153142 0.0153166 Well, more or less, I think. And then, this: [Ignat@localhost circuit_testing]$ ./test2 && ./test2 0.01531 0.0152476 Where are the 25% which should be visible? How can the first executable be even slower than the second one? I'm asking this because I'm doing a project which involves calling a lot of small functions in a row like this in order to compute the values of an array, and the code I've inherited does a very complex manipulation to avoid the virtual function call overhead. Now where is this famous call overhead?

    Read the article

  • Getting time in ubuntu

    - by user2578666
    include #include <stdio.h> int GetTime() { struct timespec tsp; clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &tsp); //Call clock_gettime to fill tsp fprintf(stdout, "time=%d.%d\n", tsp.tv_sec, tsp.tv_nsec); fflush(stdout); } I am trying to compile the above code but it keeps throwing the error: time.c: In function ‘GetTime’: time.c:12:4: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘clock_gettime’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] time.c:12:18: error: ‘CLOCK_REALTIME’ undeclared (first use in this function) time.c:12:18: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in time.c:14:4: warning: format ‘%d’ expects argument of type ‘int’, but argument 3 has type ‘__time_t’ [-Wformat] time.c:14:4: warning: format ‘%d’ expects argument of type ‘int’, but argument 4 has type ‘long int’ [-Wformat] I have tried compiling with -lrt flag and -std=gnu99. Nothing works.

    Read the article

  • Timing Calculations for Opengl ES 2.0 draw calls

    - by Arun AC
    I am drawing a cube in OpenGL ES 2.0 in Linux. I am calculating the time taken for each frame using below function #define NANO 1000000000 #define NANO_TO_MICRO(x) ((x)/1000) uint64_t getTick() { struct timespec stCT; clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &stCT); uint64_t iCurrTimeNano = (1000000000 * stCT.tv_sec + stCT.tv_nsec); // in Nano Secs uint64_t iCurrTimeMicro = NANO_TO_MICRO(iCurrTimeNano); // in Micro Secs return iCurrTimeMicro; } I am running my code for 100 frames with simple x-axis rotation. I am getting around 200 to 220 microsecs per frame. that means am i getting around (1/220microsec = 4545) FPS Is my GPU is that fast? I strongly doubt this result. what went wrong in the code? Regards, Arun AC

    Read the article

  • How do you make a precise countdown timer using clock_gettime? [migrated]

    - by Joshun
    Could somebody please explain how to make a countdown timer using clock_gettime, under Linux. I know you can use the clock() function to get cpu time, and multiply it by CLOCKS_PER_SEC to get actual time, but I'm told the clock() function is not well suited for this. So far I have attempted this (a billion is to pause for one second) #include <stdio.h> #include <time.h> #define BILLION 1000000000 int main() { struct timespec rawtime; clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW, &rawtime); unsigned long int current = ( rawtime.tv_sec + rawtime.tv_nsec ); unsigned long int end = (( rawtime.tv_sec + rawtime.tv_nsec ) + BILLION ); while ( current < end ) { clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW, &rawtime); current = ( rawtime.tv_sec + rawtime.tv_nsec ); } return 0; } I know this wouldn't be very useful on its own, but once I've found out how to time correctly I can use this in my projects. I know that sleep() can be used for this purpose, but I want to code the timer myself so that I can better integrate it in my projects - such as the possibility of it returning the time left, as opposed to pausing the whole program.

    Read the article

  • What time function do I need to use with pthread_cond_timedwait?

    - by Vincent
    The pthread_cond_timedwait function needs an absolute time in a time timespec structure. What time function I'm suppose to use to obtain the absolute time. I saw a lot of example on the web and I found almost all time function used. (ftime, clock, gettimeofday, clock_gettime (with all possible CLOCK_...). The pthread_cond_timedwait uses an absolute time. Will this waiting time affected by changing the time of the machine? Also if I get the absolute time with one of the time function, if the time of the machine change between the get and the addition of the delta time this will affect the affect the wait time? Is there a possibility to wait for an event with a relative time instead?

    Read the article

  • Write a program using 3 threads, one prints 10 'A's and the second prints 'B's and the third prints 10 'C's with synchrornization

    - by user132967
    Iam try to implement this questions using threads and mutex this is my code : include include include include include define Num_thread 3 pthread_mutex_t lett[Num_thread]; void Sleep_rand(double max) { struct timespec delai; delai.tv_sec=max; delai.tv_nsec=0; nanosleep(&delai,NULL); } void *Print_Sequence(); int main() { int i; pthread_t tid[Num_thread];// this is threads identifier for(i=0;i<Num_thread;i++) pthread_mutex_init(&lett[i],0); for(i=0;i<Num_thread;i++) { printf("i=%d\n",i); /* create the threads / pthread_create(&tid[i], / This variable will have the thread is after successful creation / NULL, / send the thread attributes / Print_Sequence, / the function the thread will run / &i/ send the parameter's address to the function */); } /* Wait till threads are complete and join before main continues */ for (i = 0; i pthread_join(tid[i], NULL); } return 0; } /* The thread will begin control in this function */ void Print_Sequence(void param) { int i,j=(int)param; printf("j=%d\n",(*j)); int max; pthread_mutex_lock(&lett[0]); pthread_mutex_lock(&lett[1]); for (i = 1; i <= 10; i++) { max=(int) (8*rand()/(RAND_MAX+1.0)); Sleep_rand( max); printf("A"); } pthread_mutex_unlock(&lett[0]); pthread_mutex_lock(&lett[2]); for (i = 1; i <= 10; i++) { max=(int) (2*rand()/(RAND_MAX+1.0)); Sleep_rand( max); printf("B"); } for (i = 1; i <= 10; i++) { max=(int) (15*rand()/(RAND_MAX+1.0)); Sleep_rand( max); printf("C"); } pthread_mutex_unlock(&lett[1]); pthread_mutex_unlock(&lett[2]); pthread_exit(0); } and the o/p is like : AAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCC COULD ANYONE PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE WRONG WITH CODE ??

    Read the article

  • Execution time in nano seconds and related issues

    - by anup
    Hi All, I am using the following code to compute execution time in milli-secs. struct timespec tp; if (clock_gettime (CLOCK_REALTIME, &tp) == 0) return ((tp.tv_sec * 1000000000) + tp.tv_nsec); else return ; Can you please tell me whether this is correct? Let's name this function comptime_nano(). Now, I write the following code in main() to check execution times of following operations. unsigned long int a, b, s1, s3; a = (unsigned long int)(1) << 63; b = (unsigned long int)(1) << 63; btime = comptime_nano(); s1 = b >> 30; atime = comptime_nano(); printf ("Time =%ld for %lu\n", (atime - btime), s1); btime = comptime_nano(); s3 = a >> 1; atime = comptime_nano(); printf ("Time =%ld for %lu\n", (atime - btime), s3); To my surprise, the first operation takes about roughly 4 times more time than the second. Again, if I change the relative ordering of these operations, the respective timings change drastically. Please comment...

    Read the article

  • boost multi_index_container and erase performance

    - by rjoshi
    I have a boost multi_index_container declared as below which is indexed by hash_unique id(unsigned long) and hash_non_unique transaction id(long). Insertion and retrieval of elements is fast but when I delete elements, it is much slower. I was expecting it to be constant time as key is hashed. e.g To erase elements from container for 10,000 elements, it takes around 2.53927016 seconds for 15,000 elements, it takes around 7.137100068 seconds for 20,000 elements, it takes around 21.391720757 seconds Is it something I am missing or is it expected behavior? class Session { public: Session() { //increment unique id static unsigned long counter = 0; boost::mutex::scoped_lock guard(mx); counter++; m_nId = counter; } unsigned long GetId() { return m_nId; } long GetTransactionHandle(){ return m_nTransactionHandle; } .... private: unsigned long m_nId; long m_nTransactionHandle; boost::mutext mx; .... }; typedef multi_index_container< Session*, indexed_by< hashed_unique< mem_fun<Session,unsigned long,&Session::GetId> >, hashed_non_unique< mem_fun<Session,unsigned long,&Session::GetTransactionHandle> > > //end indexed_by > SessionContainer; typedef SessionContainer::nth_index<0>::type SessionById; int main() { ... SessionContainer container; SessionById *pSessionIdView = &get<0>(container); unsigned counter = atoi(argv[1]); vector<Session*> vSes(counter); //insert for(unsigned i = 0; i < counter; i++) { Session *pSes = new Session(); container.insert(pSes); vSes.push_back(pSes); } timespec ts; lock_settime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &ts); //erase for(unsigned i = 0; i < counter; i++) { pSessionIdView->erase(vSes[i]->getId()); delete vSes[i]; } lock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &ts); std::cout << "Total time taken for erase:" << ts.tv_sec << "." << ts.tv_nsec << "\n"; return (EXIST_SUCCESS); }

    Read the article

  • Is typeid of type name always evaluated at compile time in c++ ?

    - by cyril42e
    I wanted to check that typeid is evaluated at compile time when used with a type name (ie typeid(int), typeid(std::string)...). To do so, I repeated in a loop the comparison of two typeid calls, and compiled it with optimizations enabled, in order to see if the compiler simplified the loop (by looking at the execution time which is 1us when it simplifies instead of 160ms when it does not). And I get strange results, because sometimes the compiler simplifies the code, and sometimes it does not. I use g++ (I tried different 4.x versions), and here is the program: #include <iostream> #include <typeinfo> #include <time.h> class DisplayData {}; class RobotDisplay: public DisplayData {}; class SensorDisplay: public DisplayData {}; class RobotQt {}; class SensorQt {}; timespec tp1, tp2; const int n = 1000000000; int main() { int avg = 0; clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &tp1); for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) { // if (typeid(RobotQt) == typeid(RobotDisplay)) // (1) compile time // if (typeid(SensorQt) == typeid(SensorDisplay)) // (2) compile time if (typeid(RobotQt) == typeid(RobotDisplay) || typeid(SensorQt) == typeid(SensorDisplay)) // (3) not compile time ???!!! avg++; else avg--; } clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &tp2); std::cout << "time (" << avg << "): " << (tp2.tv_sec-tp1.tv_sec)*1000000000+(tp2.tv_nsec-tp1.tv_nsec) << " ns" << std::endl; } The conditions in which this problem appear are not clear, but: - if there is no inheritance involved, no problem (always compile time) - if I do only one comparison, no problem - the problem only appears only with a disjunction of comparisons if all the terms are false So is there something I didn't get with how typeid works (is it always supposed to be evaluated at compilation time when used with type names?) or may this be a gcc bug in evaluation or optimization? About the context, I tracked down the problem to this very simplified example, but my goal is to use typeid with template types (as partial function template specialization is not possible). Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • Problem measuring N times the execution time of a code block

    - by Nazgulled
    EDIT: I just found my problem after writing this long post explaining every little detail... If someone can give me a good answer on what I'm doing wrong and how can I get the execution time in seconds (using a float with 5 decimal places or so), I'll mark that as accepted. Hint: The problem was on how I interpreted the clock_getttime() man page. Hi, Let's say I have a function named myOperation that I need to measure the execution time of. To measure it, I'm using clock_gettime() as it was recommend here in one of the comments. My teacher recommends us to measure it N times so we can get an average, standard deviation and median for the final report. He also recommends us to execute myOperation M times instead of just one. If myOperation is a very fast operation, measuring it M times allow us to get a sense of the "real time" it takes; cause the clock being used might not have the required precision to measure such operation. So, execution myOperation only one time or M times really depends if the operation itself takes long enough for the clock precision we are using. I'm having trouble dealing with that M times execution. Increasing M decreases (a lot) the final average value. Which doesn't make sense to me. It's like this, on average you take 3 to 5 seconds to travel from point A to B. But then you go from A to B and back to A 5 times (which makes it 10 times, cause A to B is the same as B to A) and you measure that. Than you divide by 10, the average you get is supposed to be the same average you take traveling from point A to B, which is 3 to 5 seconds. This is what I want my code to do, but it's not working. If I keep increasing the number of times I go from A to B and back A, the average will be lower and lower each time, it makes no sense to me. Enough theory, here's my code: #include <stdio.h> #include <time.h> #define MEASUREMENTS 1 #define OPERATIONS 1 typedef struct timespec TimeClock; TimeClock diffTimeClock(TimeClock start, TimeClock end) { TimeClock aux; if((end.tv_nsec - start.tv_nsec) < 0) { aux.tv_sec = end.tv_sec - start.tv_sec - 1; aux.tv_nsec = 1E9 + end.tv_nsec - start.tv_nsec; } else { aux.tv_sec = end.tv_sec - start.tv_sec; aux.tv_nsec = end.tv_nsec - start.tv_nsec; } return aux; } int main(void) { TimeClock sTime, eTime, dTime; int i, j; for(i = 0; i < MEASUREMENTS; i++) { printf(" » MEASURE %02d\n", i+1); clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &sTime); for(j = 0; j < OPERATIONS; j++) { myOperation(); } clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &eTime); dTime = diffTimeClock(sTime, eTime); printf(" - NSEC (TOTAL): %ld\n", dTime.tv_nsec); printf(" - NSEC (OP): %ld\n\n", dTime.tv_nsec / OPERATIONS); } return 0; } Notes: The above diffTimeClock function is from this blog post. I replaced my real operation with myOperation() because it doesn't make any sense to post my real functions as I would have to post long blocks of code, you can easily code a myOperation() with whatever you like to compile the code if you wish. As you can see, OPERATIONS = 1 and the results are: » MEASURE 01 - NSEC (TOTAL): 27456580 - NSEC (OP): 27456580 For OPERATIONS = 100 the results are: » MEASURE 01 - NSEC (TOTAL): 218929736 - NSEC (OP): 2189297 For OPERATIONS = 1000 the results are: » MEASURE 01 - NSEC (TOTAL): 862834890 - NSEC (OP): 862834 For OPERATIONS = 10000 the results are: » MEASURE 01 - NSEC (TOTAL): 574133641 - NSEC (OP): 57413 Now, I'm not a math wiz, far from it actually, but this doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. I've already talked about this with a friend that's on this project with me and he also can't understand the differences. I don't understand why the value is getting lower and lower when I increase OPERATIONS. The operation itself should take the same time (on average of course, not the exact same time), no matter how many times I execute it. You could tell me that that actually depends on the operation itself, the data being read and that some data could already be in the cache and bla bla, but I don't think that's the problem. In my case, myOperation is reading 5000 lines of text from an CSV file, separating the values by ; and inserting those values into a data structure. For each iteration, I'm destroying the data structure and initializing it again. Now that I think of it, I also that think that there's a problem measuring time with clock_gettime(), maybe I'm not using it right. I mean, look at the last example, where OPERATIONS = 10000. The total time it took was 574133641ns, which would be roughly 0,5s; that's impossible, it took a couple of minutes as I couldn't stand looking at the screen waiting and went to eat something.

    Read the article

  • ubuntu: sem_timedwait not waking (C)

    - by gillez
    I have 3 processes which need to be synchronized. Process one does something then wakes process two and sleeps, which does something then wakes process three and sleeps, which does something and wakes process one and sleeps. The whole loop is timed to run around 25hz (caused by an external sync into process one before it triggers process two in my "real" application). I use sem_post to trigger (wake) each process, and sem_timedwait() to wait for the trigger. This all works successfully for several hours. However at some random time (usually after somewhere between two and four hours), one of the processes starts timing out in sem_timedwait(), even though I am sure the semaphore is being triggered with sem_post(). To prove this I even use sem_getvalue() immediately after the timeout, and the value is 1, so the timedwait should have been triggered. Please see following code: #include <stdio.h> #include <time.h> #include <string.h> #include <errno.h> #include <semaphore.h> sem_t trigger_sem1, trigger_sem2, trigger_sem3; // The main thread process. Called three times with a different num arg - 1, 2 or 3. void *thread(void *arg) { int num = (int) arg; sem_t *wait, *trigger; int val, retval; struct timespec ts; struct timeval tv; switch (num) { case 1: wait = &trigger_sem1; trigger = &trigger_sem2; break; case 2: wait = &trigger_sem2; trigger = &trigger_sem3; break; case 3: wait = &trigger_sem3; trigger = &trigger_sem1; break; } while (1) { // The first thread delays by 40ms to time the whole loop. // This is an external sync in the real app. if (num == 1) usleep(40000); // print sem value before we wait. If this is 1, sem_timedwait() will // return immediately, otherwise it will block until sem_post() is called on this sem. sem_getvalue(wait, &val); printf("sem%d wait sync sem%d. val before %d\n", num, num, val); // get current time and add half a second for timeout. gettimeofday(&tv, NULL); ts.tv_sec = tv.tv_sec; ts.tv_nsec = (tv.tv_usec + 500000); // add half a second if (ts.tv_nsec > 1000000) { ts.tv_sec++; ts.tv_nsec -= 1000000; } ts.tv_nsec *= 1000; /* convert to nanosecs */ retval = sem_timedwait(wait, &ts); if (retval == -1) { // timed out. Print value of sem now. This should be 0, otherwise sem_timedwait // would have woken before timeout (unless the sem_post happened between the // timeout and this call to sem_getvalue). sem_getvalue(wait, &val); printf("!!!!!! sem%d sem_timedwait failed: %s, val now %d\n", num, strerror(errno), val); } else printf("sem%d wakeup.\n", num); // get value of semaphore to trigger. If it's 1, don't post as it has already been // triggered and sem_timedwait on this sem *should* not block. sem_getvalue(trigger, &val); if (val <= 0) { printf("sem%d send sync sem%d. val before %d\n", num, (num == 3 ? 1 : num+1), val); sem_post(trigger); } else printf("!! sem%d not sending sync, val %d\n", num, val); } } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { pthread_t t1, t2, t3; // create semaphores. val of sem1 is 1 to trigger straight away and start the whole ball rolling. if (sem_init(&trigger_sem1, 0, 1) == -1) perror("Error creating trigger_listman semaphore"); if (sem_init(&trigger_sem2, 0, 0) == -1) perror("Error creating trigger_comms semaphore"); if (sem_init(&trigger_sem3, 0, 0) == -1) perror("Error creating trigger_vws semaphore"); pthread_create(&t1, NULL, thread, (void *) 1); pthread_create(&t2, NULL, thread, (void *) 2); pthread_create(&t3, NULL, thread, (void *) 3); pthread_join(t1, NULL); pthread_join(t2, NULL); pthread_join(t3, NULL); } The following output is printed when the program is running correctly (at the start and for a random but long time after). The value of sem1 is always 1 before thread1 waits as it sleeps for 40ms, by which time sem3 has triggered it, so it wakes straight away. The other two threads wait until the semaphore is received from the previous thread. [...] sem1 wait sync sem1. val before 1 sem1 wakeup. sem1 send sync sem2. val before 0 sem2 wakeup. sem2 send sync sem3. val before 0 sem2 wait sync sem2. val before 0 sem3 wakeup. sem3 send sync sem1. val before 0 sem3 wait sync sem3. val before 0 sem1 wait sync sem1. val before 1 sem1 wakeup. sem1 send sync sem2. val before 0 [...] However, after a few hours, one of the threads begins to timeout. I can see from the output that the semaphore is being triggered, and when I print the value after the timeout is is 1. So sem_timedwait should have woken up well before the timeout. I would never expect the value of the semaphore to be 1 after the timeout, save for the very rare occasion (almost certainly never but it's possible) when the trigger happens after the timeout but before I call sem_getvalue. Also, once it begins to fail, every sem_timedwait() on that semaphore also fails in the same way. See the following output, which I've line-numbered: 01 sem3 wait sync sem3. val before 0 02 sem1 wakeup. 03 sem1 send sync sem2. val before 0 04 sem2 wakeup. 05 sem2 send sync sem3. val before 0 06 sem2 wait sync sem2. val before 0 07 sem1 wait sync sem1. val before 0 08 !!!!!! sem3 sem_timedwait failed: Connection timed out, val now 1 09 sem3 send sync sem1. val before 0 10 sem3 wait sync sem3. val before 1 11 sem3 wakeup. 12 !! sem3 not sending sync, val 1 13 sem3 wait sync sem3. val before 0 14 sem1 wakeup. [...] On line 1, thread 3 (which I have confusingly called sem1 in the printf) waits for sem3 to be triggered. On line 5, sem2 calls sem_post for sem3. However, line 8 shows sem3 timing out, but the value of the semaphore is 1. thread3 then triggers sem1 and waits again (10). However, because the value is already 1, it wakes straight away. It doesn't send sem1 again as this has all happened before control is given to thread1, however it then waits again (val is now 0) and sem1 wakes up. This now repeats for ever, sem3 always timing out and showing that the value is 1. So, my question is why does sem3 timeout, even though the semaphore has been triggered and the value is clearly 1? I would never expect to see line 08 in the output. If it times out (because, say thread 2 has crashed or is taking too long), the value should be 0. And why does it work fine for 3 or 4 hours first before getting into this state? This is using Ubuntu 9.4 with kernel 2.6.28. The same procedure has been working properly on Redhat and Fedora. But I'm now trying to port to ubuntu! Thanks for any advice, Giles

    Read the article

1