Hi, Nishanth,
To my uneducated eye, this patch looks like a useful cleaning-up of the
timer API. I do have one question, though...
> @@ -238,15 +327,41 @@ void add_timer_on(struct timer_list *tim
> check_timer(timer);
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&base->lock, flags);
> + timer->expires = jiffies_to_timerintervals(timer->expires);
It would appear that, depending on where you are, ->expires can be
expressed in two different units. Users of add_timer() and mod_timer()
are expecting jiffies, but the internal code uses timer intervals. What
happens when somebody does something like this?
mod_timer(&my_timer, my_timer.expires + additional_delay);
Might it be better to store the timerintervals value in a different
field, and leave ->expires as part of the legacy interface only?
jon
Jonathan Corbet
Executive editor, LWN.net
[email protected]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
