[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0902081127510.18839@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 11:29:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
cc: "linux-man@...r.kernel.org" <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Why does timerfd() only support CLOCK_REALTIME and
CLOCK_MONOTONIC?
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hi Davide,
>
> At the moment I'm looking into writing man pages for timer_create(2)
> and friends. (Somewhat bizarrely, these pages do not yet exist.) As
> I looked into the source code of timer_create(), etc., and did some
> tests, I saw that timer_create() supports the following clocks:
>
> TIMER_REALTIME
> TIMER_MONOTONIC
> TIMER_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID
> TIMER_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID
> clockid obtained from clock_getcpuclockid(3)
> clockid obtained from pthread_getcpuclockid(3)
>
> On the other hand, timerfd() only permits the first two of these.
> What's the reason for that limitation of timerfd()? (It may be worth
> adding something to the man page on this point.)
No particular reason I can think of. If Thomas makes invalid_clockid()
available, we could allow timerfd() to support all time timers
timer_create() supports.
Do you see any reason why this won't work Thomas?
- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists