Re: [PATCH 1/5] generic clocksource updates

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> > Currently this field isn't needed and as soon we have a need for it, we 
> > can add proper capability information.
> 
> Is there a reason, why requirements which are known from existing
> experience must be discarded to be reintroduced later ?

Then please explain these requirements.
This field shouldn't have been added in first place, I guess I managed to 
confuse John when I talked about handling of continuous vs. tick based 
clocks. Currently no user should even care about this, it's an 
implementation detail of the clock.

bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/