[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1233781499.15119.135.camel@desktop>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 13:04:59 -0800
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH NET-NEXT 01/10] clocksource: allow usage independent of
timekeeping.c
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 12:06 -0800, john stultz wrote:
> The duplication is only at a very low level. He could not reuse the
> established clocksource system without really breaking its semantics.
He gave a link to the first version,
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2008/11/19/4164204
What specific semantics is he breaking there?
Daniel
--
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