randy_dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 11:26:31 -0700 Geoff Levand wrote:
>
> | This patch makes posix_bump_timer() consistent with common convention
> | by expecting a pointer to the structure be passed.
> |
> | Please apply.
>
> Does it matter other than for consistency?
>
> E.g., in a large system with thousands of timers, it seems that it
> could (at least theoretically) have a negative impact by using a
> pointer dereference instead of a known fixed address.
> or am I just imagining that?
>
I pulled this out of the HRT patches. In general it was agreed that
the change is for the best.
-Geoff
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |