emo/busybox
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

ping: use setitimer() instead of ualarm()

Browse Source 
function                                             old     new   delta
sendping_tail                                        218     265     +47
ualarm                                                79       -     -79
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(add/remove: 0/2 grow/shrink: 1/0 up/down: 47/-79)            Total: -32 bytes

Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Denys Vlasenko 2018-08-25 19:36:06 +02:00
parent 3759516672
commit 78a5ef9d2c
1 changed files with 8 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
networking/ping.c
View File

@ -485,9 +485,15 @@ static void sendping_tail(void (*sp)(int), int size_pkt)
bb_error_msg_and_die(bb_msg_write_error);
if (pingcount == 0 || G.ntransmitted < pingcount) {
/* Didn't send all pings yet - schedule next in 1s */
/* Didn't send all pings yet - schedule next in -i SEC interval */
struct itimerval i;
signal(SIGALRM, sp);
ualarm(G.interval_us, 0);
/*ualarm(G.interval_us, 0); - does not work for >=1sec on some libc */
i.it_interval.tv_sec = 0;
i.it_interval.tv_usec = 0;
i.it_value.tv_sec = G.interval_us / 1000000;
i.it_value.tv_usec = G.interval_us % 1000000;
setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &i, NULL);
} else { /* -c NN, and all NN are sent */
/* Wait for the last ping to come back.
* -W timeout: wait for a response in seconds.