linux-kernel - Re: [patch 6/9] signalfd/timerfd v3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703111715460.4936@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Sun, 11 Mar 2007 17:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 6/9] signalfd/timerfd v3 - timerfd core ...

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007, Nicholas Miell wrote:

> You should probably make it behave like the other things that use
> itimerspec, just to avoid confusion -- i.e. timers are relative by
> default, there's a flag that makes them absolute, they expire when
> it_value specifies, and repeat every it_interval nanoseconds if
> it_interval is non-zero.
> 
> i.e.
> 
> int timerfd(int ufd, int clockid, int flags, const struct timespec
> *utmr);
> 
> with TFD_TIMER_ABS in flags making the timer absolute instead of
> relative (and no TFD_TIMER_REL or TFD_TIMER_SEQ at all).

Sounds sane to me. Will do...


- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/