[Patches] [ python-Patches-1607149 ] bug# 1607041: Condition.wait timeout fails on clock change

SourceForge.net noreply at sourceforge.net
Sat Feb 10 20:26:17 CET 2007

Patches item #1607149, was opened at 2006-12-01 23:32
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by loewis
You can respond by visiting: 

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Library (Lib)
Group: Python 2.4
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: BC (hashstat)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: bug# 1607041: Condition.wait timeout fails on clock change

Initial Comment:
This patch if for bug# 1607041.

If the system clock is adjusted after Condition.wait is called with a timeout, the timeout does not expire as expected. This appears to be due to the threading.Condition class using the system clock to calculate the timeout expiration without taking system clock changes into account.

No matter what timeout is used, setting the system clock ahead reduces or eliminates the wait while setting the system clock back increases the wait.  So if the clock is set back one hour in the middle of a 1 microsecond wait (c.wait(1)), wait will return in an hour and 1 microsecond rather than after 1 microsecond.

This patch modifies the Condition classes wait method to check for variations in the clock between calls to sleep and ajust for abnormalities.


>Comment By: Martin v. Löwis (loewis)
Date: 2007-02-10 20:26

Logged In: YES 
Originator: NO

DST is irrelevant for this discussion. On WIndows NT+, the system clock
(as returned by libc ftime/windows GetSystemTime) is always in UTC (broken
down to a Gregorian date). It is thus not affected by DST changes.

What does matter for this bug is administrator changes to the system time
(like manual changes), and time adjustments due to NTP (although the
Windows NTP implementation will perform a non-monototic change only during
boot, AFAIK).


Comment By: Josiah Carlson (josiahcarlson)
Date: 2007-02-10 19:02

Logged In: YES 
Originator: NO

Really, it would be better if time.sleep was based off of a monotonic
clock, then everything could use the single working API, and we wouldn't
need to monkey-patch everything that uses sleep.

Unfortunately, due to the insanity that is the underlying Windows
platform, the bios clock is set to local time and is converted to UTC
(which is then used natively by NT).  There is a work-around involving
setting the system clock to UTC and setting a registry setting, but it
doesn't always work, can cause 100% CPU usage during DST changes, and
doesn't propagate time changes from NT to the underlying clock.


An alternate (or additional option) is to just disable DST changes,
manually adjust times as necessary (or using a script that runs only at
boot), and never run any software while adjusting the time.


Considering the recent changes to DST, the latter link is probably more


Comment By: Martin v. Löwis (loewis)
Date: 2006-12-03 08:11

Logged In: YES 
Originator: NO

It would be better if this was based on a monotonic clock if available on
the system (such as the  POSIX CLOCK_MONOTONIC argument to clock_gettime).
"Guessing" jumps in the time is inherently unreliable; in your code, you
won't notice changes that involve less than 10s.

Notice that the same problem exists for Thread.join; it would be good if
they were fixed together.


You can respond by visiting: 

More information about the Patches mailing list