[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72nGoT9DxLwDbg8gZVxk0ba=KqvXLAVz=hRNFMqtCeGNvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 18:45:13 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
Cc: aliceryhl@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com,
tmgross@...ch.edu, ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net,
bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, benno.lossin@...ton.me, a.hindborg@...sung.com,
anna-maria@...utronix.de, frederic@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
arnd@...db.de, jstultz@...gle.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/8] rust: time: Change output of Ktime's sub
operation to Delta
On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 9:11 AM FUJITA Tomonori
<fujita.tomonori@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Surely, we could create both Delta and Instant. What is Ktime used
> for? Both can simply use bindings::ktime_t like the followings?
I think it may help having 2 (public) types, rather than reusing the
`Ktime` name for one of them, because people may associate several
concepts to `ktime_t` which is what they know already, but I would
suggest mentioning in the docs clearly that these maps to usecase
subsets of `ktime_t` (whether we mention or not that they are
supposed to be `ktime_t`s is another thing, even if they are).
Whether we have a third private type internally for `Ktime` or not
does not matter much, so whatever is best for implementation purposes.
And if we do have a private `Ktime`, I would avoid making it public
unless there is a good reason for doing so.
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists