linux-kernel - RE: RFC: better timer interface

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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705231358220.2740@nanos>
Date:   Tue, 23 May 2017 13:58:57 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Gross <mark.gross@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: RE: RFC: better timer interface

On Tue, 23 May 2017, David Laight wrote:

> From: Thomas Gleixner
> > Sent: 21 May 2017 19:15
> ...
> > > timer_start(timer, ms, abs)
> > 
> > I'm not even sure, whether we need absolute timer wheel timers at
> > all, because most use cases are relative to now.
> 
> Posix requires absolute timers for some userspace calls
> (annoying because the code often wants relative).

Posix is completely irrelevant here. These timers are purely kernel
internal.

Thanks,

	tglx