Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification

[George Anzinger]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I think the accepted and standard way to do this is to use different 
> > "clock"s. For example, in the HRT patch the clocks CLOCK_REALTIME_HR and 
> > CLOCK_MONOTONIC_HR are defined as high resolution clocks.
>
>
> Note precision here can be fairly long - some timers dont even
> if they run a minute earlier or later or even longer. For others
> it can be rather small.
>
> I dont think you want own clocks for all possible numbers. It makes
> much more sense to give a numerical time offset.

That may be, but you will have a hard time finding a standard confroming way to 
pass that info into the kernel.  A few well chosen points should do it...

>
--
George Anzinger   george@xxxxxxxxxx
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/