Re: [PATCHv1] timekeeping: Update multiplier when NTP frequency is set directly

[Miroslav Lichvar]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:42:05AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:53 AM, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > -void update_wall_time(void)
> > +static void timekeeping_advance(bool force_update)
> 
> This is kind of a nit, but mind switching out bool for an enum?  Using
> something like TK_ADV_NORMAL and TK_ADV_FORCE?
> 
> > +void update_wall_time(void)
> > +{
> > +       timekeeping_advance(false);
> > +}
> 
> The enum makes usage like timekeeping_advance(false) a little less
> opaque to the reader ("Wait, don't advance? Let me go look at the
> function").
> 
> We got bitten by this earlier when we had the old
> "timekeeping_update(tk, true, false, true)" usage.

Ok. That make sense. I'll send a v2.

Thanks,

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar