On Dec 01, 2005, at 20:01, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Kyle Moffett wrote:
I'm not against HR timer, I have a problem with using them as
timer for
everything.
This is _exactly_ why there is the timer/timeout distinction.
Some things don't care, and as a result use a timer wheel exactly
like they always have. For the things that do, however, the new
timer API provides it using the fastest hardware interface available.
This is about kernel programming - people should care.
My _point_ is that some code doesn't care about accuracy. If a
networking timeout occurs a half-second later than it should, nothing
bad happens. We have configurable SCSI drive timeouts, precisely
because it doesn't really matter all that much if we deliver it now
or give the drive a couple seconds extra time to try to respond
before signalling a reset. And I agree with you that people should
care, this distinction is important.
We have enough crap as it is. timer wheel is fast as well, but
everything has its limits, putting this focus completely to
delivery is nonsense. It can't be that difficult to put together a
decent list of criteria, where to use which timer.
A ktimer should be used where the common case is the timer being
added and expiring. A ktimeout should be used where the common case
is the timer being added and removed before it expires. Simple enough?
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
I lost interest in "blade servers" when I found they didn't throw
knives at people who weren't supposed to be in your machine room.
-- Anthony de Boer
-
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]
