[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTinFwmd-gEmSFpTuBg_dueXWGg5mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 17:17:02 +0200
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
johnstul@...ibm.com, davidel@...ilserver.org, virtuoso@...nd.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, chris.friesen@...band.com,
kirill@...temov.name, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:timers/core] timerfd: Allow timers to be cancelled when
clock was set
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 17:11, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 16:53 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>
>> > Dunno, an eventfd that triggers every time someone calls adjtime() and
>> > related?
>>
>> I think, we are exactly not interested in adjtime() calls, but only in
>> jumps in wall clock time.
>
> adjtime(), adjtimex() and settimeofday() are afaik the only ways to make
> walltime jump. Anyway what are you arguing about, don't you want the
> notification or do you insist on making the kernel slower for the 3
> people who care about this daftness?
I want a sane interface to get notified about changes to the time
which I asked the kernel to manage for me while I'm sleeping. The
interface in this patch does exactly that, in a very nice way.
If you think that needs to change, please discuss/provide
alternatives, which we can check if they sufficiently work for us,
like we did with this patch.
But please stop rhetorically asking me if I want a slower kernel, and
chance your tone. That will get us nowhere.
Kay
--
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