Hi,
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
> Hmm, I cannot think of more ways to specify a timeout than how
> long I want to wait (relative) or until when (absolute) and which
> is the reference clock. And they don't seem broken to me, common
> sense, in any case. Do you have any examples?
You still didn't explain what's the point in choosing different clock
sources for a _timeout_.
> Different versions of the same function that do relative, absolute.
> If I keep going that way, the reason becomes:
>
> sys_mutex_lock
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_realtime
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_realtime
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_monotonic
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_monotonic
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_monotonic_highres
> sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_monotonic_highres
Hiding it behind an API makes it better?
You didn't answer my other question, let's assume we add such a timeout
structure, what's wrong with converting it to kernel time (which would
automatically validate it).
bye, Roman
-
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]
| |
 |