On Dec 07, 2005, at 07:34, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, James Bruce wrote:
And that's the whole *point* about how we got here. Let the low
resolution, low lifetime timeouts stay on the timer wheel, and
make a new approach that specializes in handling longer lifetime,
higher resolution timers. That's ktimers in a nutshell. You seem
to be arguing for it rather than against it.
I do, just without the focus on the lifetime, which is really
unimportant for most kernel developers.
It _is_ important. Not because kernel developers do care about it,
but because it's important for reasons of its own and therefore they
should. Networking timeouts and highres audio timers are two _VERY_
different applications of "do this thing then", and kernel developers
should be made aware of them. If you disagree, please explain in
detail exactly why you think the lifetime is unimportant. I have yet
to see an email regarding this, and I've searched the archives pretty
carefully, in addition to watching this thread.
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]
