RE: FW: [RFC] A more general timeout specification

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Daniel Walker wrote:

> > What "more versions" are you talking about? When you convert a user time 
> > to kernel time you can automatically validate it and later you can use 
> > standard kernel APIs, so you don't have to add even more API bloat.
> 
> What's kernel time? Are you talking about jiffies? The whole point of
> multiple clocks is to allow for different degrees of precision. 

For a timeout? Please get real.
If you need more precision, use a dedicated timer API, but don't make the 
general case more complex for the 99.99% of other users.

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]
  Powered by Linux