Re: [PATCH 1/6] hrtimer: Provide clock_was_set_delayed()

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:05 -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
> Both of those options seem like a lot of work for something that happens once
> every 3-4 years, and may not happen ever again[1].  Based on that statement, if
> we're going to modify code I would prefer that it be as lightweight as possible.
>  So, in terms of the kernel, option 2 is likely the best way to go rather than
> introducing new code that will be used once every 3-4 years. 

Full agreed, however if we implement clock_was_set() like I just
proposed we'd use that code for every time the clock was modified, which
is a lot more often.

That said, I'm not a particular fan of it..
--
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/