Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 13/22 -v2] handle accurate time keeping over long delays | | From | john stultz <> | | Date | Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:41:17 -0800 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 15:15 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > I'm trying to figure out all the ramifications of the new > > "cycle_accumulated" field. Does it really need to be > > John, > > Before we hardcode these names, can we change them? Later in the series I > use something called 'cycle_raw' which really should be called > 'cycle_accumulated'. Since cycle_accumulated IIRC can go backwards.
Err... I don't think the current cycle_accumulated can go backwards. Or maybe I'm missing what you mean.
> Or do you think I should rename cycle_raw to cycle_monotonic?
That's fine by me either way.
thanks -john
|  |