Re: [patch 6/9] signalfd/timerfd v1 - timerfd core ...

[Davide Libenzi]

On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Nicholas Miell wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 22:38 -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> > 
> > > Why did you ignore the existing POSIX timer API?
> > 
> > The existing POSIX API is a standard and a very good one. Too bad it does 
> > not deliver to files. The timerfd code is, as you can probably read from 
> > the code, a really thin wrapper around the existing hrtimer.c Linux code.
> 
> So extend the existing POSIX timer API to deliver expiry events via a
> fd.

It'll be out of standard as timerfd is, w/out code savings. Look at the 
code and tell me what could be saved. Prolly the ten lines of the timer 
callback. Lines that you'll have to drop inside the current posix timer 
layer. Better leave standards alone, especially like in this case, when 
the savings are not there.



- Davide


-
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/