Sven Gothel wrote:

On Tuesday, November 16, 2010 12:36:49 gouessej [via jogamp] wrote:
>
> foxua wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the reply
> > AFAIK nanotime() implementation has a bug - on some multicore systems it
> > behaves incorrectly.
> > I'll try to use nanotime() - maybe Oracle fixed it - I don't know.
> >
> I know this bug, I use a small workaround in TUER to detect when the time
> "seems" to come back :s It concerns only AMD microprocessors as far as I
> know.

We may add something in gluegen Platform class:
        long getNanoTime(); // @return >=0 supported, <0 unsupported

just tell me where to fetch your implementation .. thank you.
Other ideas welcome, but I won't do it myself now, no time.

The native high-resolution timer used in LockSupport is not concerned by this bug. I have looked at my source code, I don't find the hack I used. Actually, I called very often System.nanoTime() and when 2 successive calls gave absurd result, I used the Olympic average to compute the elapsed time.

http://tuer.sourceforge.net
http://gouessej.wordpress.com

---

View message @ http://jogamp.762907.n3.nabble.com/High-resolution-timer-tp1901680p1911462.html
To start a new topic under jogamp, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from jogamp, click here.

-- 
http://michael-bien.com/