Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 May 2005 18:12:15 -0700 | From | George Anzinger <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: >>I think the accepted and standard way to do this is to use different >>"clock"s. For example, in the HRT patch the clocks CLOCK_REALTIME_HR and >>CLOCK_MONOTONIC_HR are defined as high resolution clocks. > > > Note precision here can be fairly long - some timers dont even > if they run a minute earlier or later or even longer. For others > it can be rather small. > > I dont think you want own clocks for all possible numbers. It makes > much more sense to give a numerical time offset.
That may be, but you will have a hard time finding a standard confroming way to pass that info into the kernel. A few well chosen points should do it...
> -- George Anzinger george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ - 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/
| |