Hi,
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > 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
Please be precise, the "for most kernel developers" part is important.
In most situations this guideline is more than enough:
- if you need fast and simple timer, use normal timer
- if you need higher resolution, use hrtimer
Only if you want to push the timer system to its limits, you have to take
the corner cases into account. I consider lifetime issues an advanced
topic of timer programming, which Joe Kernelhacker doesn't has to be
overly concerned about (it worked quite well so far).
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]
