From: "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...> Date: 2013-10-02T03:48:34+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:57558] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8658] Process.clock_gettime Issue #8658 has been updated by headius (Charles Nutter). I missed the discussion on this, but here's the summary of JRuby/JVM case: If monotonic clock is available at OS level, System.nanoTime is equivalent to clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC). I suppose there may be some embedded systems or obscure platforms that don't have a monotonic clock, but otherwise I'm guessing this is going to be pretty universal across *nixes. The code in JDK is in http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/hotspot/file/9b0ca45cd756/src/os/linux/vm/os_linux.cpp at line 1453. If monotonic clock is not available on *nix, JVM will fall back on gettimeofday transparently. I'm investigating whether it is possible for us to query this behavior. System.currentTimeMillis is just a plain gettimeofday call, which in the Process::clock_gettime API is called GETTIMEOFDAY_BASED_CLOCK_REALTIME. So JRuby will always be able to support GETTIMEOFDAY_BASED_CLOCK_REALTIME via System.currentTimeMillis, CLOCK_MONOTONIC when nanoTime is monotonic, and the other forms when we're able to make a native downcall. Initially, we will probably just support these two. I HAVE A QUESTION, however... what about Windows? There's no mention at all in the rdoc about Windows support. I need to investigate what currentTimeMillis and nanoTime do on JVM on Windows. ---------------------------------------- Feature #8658: Process.clock_gettime https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8658#change-42175 Author: akr (Akira Tanaka) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: How about adding a new method, Process.clock_gettime(clk_id) ? Recently there were two feature request for measuring time. Feature #8640 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8640 Feature #8096 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8096 It seems they are somewhat different. clock_gettime() function defined by POSIX is a good candidate for providing as a method. I think it can supports the both request. Also, it has less possible design choices than the requests because clock_gettime() is defined by POSIX. People familiar to POSIX can learn the method more easily. I wrote a patch to implement Process.clock_gettime. This method can be used as follows. % ./ruby -e 'p Process.clock_gettime(Process::CLOCK_MONOTONIC)' 2701692957811563 Several considerations: I implemented the method as a module function of Process. It is same as Process.times. I expect clock_gettime is used mainly for measuring time interval and wall clock time is not important. So I didn't use Time. The method returns a number of nanoseconds as an integer. It is not so unexpected if user knows clock_gettime() in POSIX. clock_gettime() returns it as struct timespec which contains two fields: tv_sec and tv_nsec. Although tv_sec is time_t, Time is not appropriate because the origin (zero) can be other than the Epoch. Actually CLOCK_MONOTONIC means elapsed time since the system start-up time on Linux. Also, I expect the result is subtracted in most case: t1 = Process.clock_gettime(...) ... t2 = Process.clock_gettime(...) t = t2 - t1 So the result should be easy to subtract. An array such as [sec, nsec] is difficult to subtract. The result is an integer, not a float. IEEE 754 double is not enough to represent the result of clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME). It contains 19 digits in decimal now but IEEE 754 double can represent only 15 digits. On LP64 systems, Fixnum can represent 2**62-1. So (2**62-1)/(365.25*24*60*60*1e9)=146.1 years are representable without object allocation. On ILP32 and LLP64 systems, Fixnum can represent 2**30-1. So (2**30-1)/1e9=1.07 seconds are representable without object allocation. This means Bignum allocations are mostly required except the origin is very recent. clock_gettime() is defined by POSIX. Linux, NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD has it, at least. If clock_gettime() is not available, an emulation layer for CLOCK_REALTIME is implementable using gettimeofday(). (not implemented yet, though.) Any comments? -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/