Hi,
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> That being said, I'll confess that I've largely ignored this discussion in
> the hope that things would get sorted out. Seems that this won't be
> happening and as Roman's opinions carry weight I do intend to solicit a
> (brief!) summary of his objections from him when the patch comes round
> again. Sorry.
It's rather simple:
- "timer API" vs "timeout API": I got absolutely no acknowlegement that
this might be a little confusing and in consequence "process timer" may be
a better name.
- I pointed out various (IMO) unnecessary complexities, which were rather
quickly brushed off e.g. with a need for further (not closer specified)
cleanups.
- resolution handling: at what resolution should/does the kernel work and
what do we report to user space. The spec allows multiple interpretations
and I have a hard time to get at least one coherent interpretation out of
Thomas.
Maybe I'm the only one who found Thomas answers a little superficial, but
as this is a central kernel subsystem I think it deserves a closer look
and everytime I tried to poke a little deeper I got nothing.
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
