Re: [patch 00/21] hrtimer - High-resolution timer subsystem

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > Maybe it is that timeout is an end result, but timer is a mechanism.  
>
> hm, i think you are right.
>
>
> > So maybe it should be 'struct interval', 'struct timeout'; or 'struct 
> > timer', 'struct timeout_timer'.
>
> maybe 'struct timer' and 'struct hrtimer' is the right solution after 
> all, and our latest queue doing 'struct timer_list' + 'struct hrtimer' 
> is actually quite close to it.
> 'struct ptimer' does have a bit of vagueness in it at first sight, do 
> you agree with that? (does it mean 'process'? 'posix'? 'precision'?) 
Yes I would agree that the p doesn't add much, wheras hrtimer at least
*rules out* the obvious process and posix.

I can't see a problem with timer and hrtimer myself.

Thanks,
Nick

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/