[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: FW: [RFC] A more general timeout specification
Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
> In this structure,
> the user specifies:
> whether the time is absolute, or relative to 'now'.

> Timeout_sleep has a return argument, endtime, which is also in
> 'struct timeout' format. If the input time was relative, then
> it is converted to absolute and returned through this argument.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the endtime to be returned in the same
format (relative/absolute) as the original timer was specified? That
way an application can set a new timer for "timeout + SLEEPTIME" and on
average it will be reasonably accurate.

In the proposed method, for endtime to be useful the app needs to check
the current time, compare with the endtime, and figure out the delta.
If you're going to force the app to do all that work anyway, the app may
as well use absolute times.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-31 23:23    [W:0.036 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site