[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1190496385.4035.124.camel@chaos>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 23:26:25 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@....net>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, geoff@...are.org.uk,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, vda.linux@...glemail.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
David Härdeman <david@...deman.nu>
Subject: Re: RFC: A revised timerfd API
On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 14:07 -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>
> > So I'm inclined to implement option (b), unless someone has strong
> > objections. Davide, could I persuade you to help?
>
> I guess I better do, otherwise you'll continue to stress me ;)
>
> int timerfd_create(int clockid);
> int timerfd_settime(int ufd, int flags,
> const struct itimerspec *utmr,
> struct itimerspec *otmr);
> int timerfd_gettime(int ufd, struct itimerspec *otmr);
>
> Patch below. Builds, not tested yet (you need to remove the "broken"
> status from CONFIG_TIMERFD in case you want to test - and plug the new
> syscall to arch/xxx).
> May that work for you?
> Thomas-san, hrtimer_try_to_cancel() does not touch ->expires and I assume
> it'll never do, granted?
Davide-san, I have no intention to change that, but remember there is
this file "Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt" :)
tglx
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists