lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5
Hi,

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 linux@horizon.com wrote:

> > - "timer API" vs "timeout API": I got absolutely no acknowlegement that
> > this might be a little confusing and in consequence "process timer" may be
> > a better name.
>
> I have to disagree. Once you grasp the desirability of having two kinds
> of timers, one optimized for the case where it does expire, and one
> optimized for the case where it is aborted or rescheduled before its
> expiration time, the timer/timeout terminology seems quite intuitive
> to me.

Thank you, that's exactly the confusion, I'd like to avoid.

The main difference is in their possible resolution: kernel timer are a
low resolution, low overhead timer optimized for kernel needs and process
timer have a larger resolution mainly for applications, but this also
implies a larger overhead (i.e. more expensive locking).

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-17 21:07    [W:0.047 / U:0.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site