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

From: Nick Piggin
Date: Wed Dec 07 2005 - 06:40:30 EST


Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/