[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Revised timerfd() interface
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Michael Kerrisk wrote:

> You are asserting this in the face of two previous APIs designed
> by people who (at least in the case of POSIX timers) probably
> thoroughly examined and discussed existing APIs and practice.

You really think that. Uhmm, ok.

> This function is *not at all* equivalent to the "get"
> functionality of the previous APIs. The "get" functionality
> of POSIX timers (for example) returns a structure that contains
> the timer interval and the *time until the next expiration of
> the timer* (not the initial timer string, as your code above
> does).
> So come up with a reliable, race-free way of doing that in
> userspace. Then make it work for both CLOCK_MONOTONIC and
> CLOCK_REALTIME timers. (You'll certainly need to be making
> some additional system calls, by the way: at least some
> calls to clock_gettime().)

No, I don't think I will. Since 1) it's so trivial it's not even
challenging 2) you know it can be done (I assume) 3) it solves a non-case
made up to justify an API/kernel-code bloating.
But you don't need *my* signoff. Cook a working patch, make a case for it,
and gather support and signoffs. I won't be acking it because, as I said
many times, I think it's useless bloating.

- Davide

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: 2007-09-07 01:39    [W:0.050 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site