Re: [patch 04/12] posix-timers: Expand timer_[re]arm() callbacks with a boolean return value

Next message: Peter Zijlstra: "Re: [patch 05/12] posix-timers: Handle the timer_[re]arm() return value"
Previous message: Peter Zijlstra: "Re: [patch 03/12] hrtimer: Use hrtimer_start_expires_user() for hrtimer sleepers"
In reply to: Thomas Gleixner: "[patch 04/12] posix-timers: Expand timer_[re]arm() callbacks with a boolean return value"
Next in thread: John Stultz: "Re: [patch 04/12] posix-timers: Expand timer_[re]arm() callbacks with a boolean return value"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

From: Peter Zijlstra

Date: Tue Apr 07 2026 - 06:01:21 EST

On Tue, Apr 07, 2026 at 10:54:33AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> In order to catch expiry times which are already in the past the
> timer_arm() and timer_rearm() callbacks need to be able to report back to
> the caller whether the timer has been queued or not.
>
> Change the function signature and let all implementations return true for
> now. While at it simplify posix_cpu_timer_rearm().
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>